These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparing sports vision among three groups of soft tennis adolescent athletes: Normal vision, refractive errors with and without correction.
    Author: Chang ST, Liu YH, Lee JS, See LC.
    Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol; 2015 Sep; 63(9):716-21. PubMed ID: 26632127.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The effect of correcting static vision on sports vision is still not clear. AIM: To examine whether sports vision (depth perception [DP], dynamic visual acuity [DVA], eye movement [EM], peripheral vision [PV], and momentary vision [MV],) were different among soft tennis adolescent athletes with normal vision (Group A), with refractive error and corrected with (Group B) and without eyeglasses (Group C). SETTING AND DESIGN: A cross-section study was conducted. Soft tennis athletes aged 10-13 who played softball tennis for 2-5 years, and who were without any ocular diseases and without visual training for the past 3 months were recruited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DPs were measured in an absolute deviation (mm) between a moving rod and fixing rod (approaching at 25 mm/s, receding at 25 mm/s, approaching at 50 mm/s, receding at 50 mm/s) using electric DP tester. A smaller deviation represented better DP. DVA, EM, PV, and MV were measured on a scale from 1 (worse) to 10 (best) using ATHLEVISION software. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Chi-square test and Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the data among the three study groups. RESULTS: A total of 73 athletes (37 in Group A, 8 in Group B, 28 in Group C) were enrolled in this study. All four items of DP showed significant difference among the three study groups (P = 0.0051, 0.0004, 0.0095, 0.0021). PV displayed significant difference among the three study groups (P = 0.0044). There was no significant difference in DVA, EM, and MV among the three study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Significant better DP and PV were seen among soft tennis adolescent athletes with normal vision than those with refractive error regardless whether they had eyeglasses corrected. On the other hand, DVA, EM, and MV were similar among the three study groups.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]