论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨《近视眼的成因与防治进展》中提出的防近新方法并验证实际效果,为改善中小学生近视现状提供依据。方法在郑州市10所防近试点学校中,选取配合度较好的2所初中、3所小学,每校在指定年级各随机选取2个班共678名学生为实验组;在每校相同年级中再选取成绩与实验组相当的各2个班,共658名学生为对照组1;在数学水平相当的非试点学校中随机选取2所初中、3所小学,每校随机选取与实验组同年级学生各2个班,共675名学生为对照组2。主要运用降眼压操和戴凸透镜等防近新方法进行应用性研究。结果实验后,初中实验组、对照组1、对照组2的视力不良率上升幅度分别为1.62%,3.24%,13.10%,远视力下降率分别为40.65%,58.95%,83.84%。小学实验组、对照组1、对照组2的视力不良率上升幅度分别为5.32%,9.98%,13.90%,远视力下降率分别为31.25%,48.18%,59.19%。单一防近方法(40.00%)和复合防近方法(19.42%)视力下降率差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论防近新方法对中小学生均具有良好的防控效果,防近效果最好的方法是降眼压操配合戴凸透镜。
Objective To explore the new methods of prevention and prevention in myopia and its prevention and treatment, and to verify the actual results, so as to provide evidences for improving the status of myopia in primary and middle school students. Methods Two junior middle schools and three primary schools with better coordination were selected from 10 pilot schools in Zhengzhou. Each school selected 678 students in 2 classes randomly from the designated year as the experimental group. In the same grade And then select the results of the experimental group and the equivalent of 2 classes, a total of 658 students in the control group 1; mathematics level in the non-pilot schools randomly selected 2 junior high school, 3 primary schools, each school randomly selected with the experimental group with Grade 2 students each have 2 classes, a total of 675 students for the control group 2. The main use of antihypertensive ophthalmology and wear convex lens and other anti-recent methods for applied research. Results After the experiment, the rates of poor vision in junior high school experimental group, control group 1 and control group 2 were 1.62%, 3.24% and 13.10% respectively, and the decreased rates of distant vision were 40.65%, 58.95% and 83.84% respectively. The rates of poor vision in primary experimental group, control group 1 and control group 2 were 5.32%, 9.98% and 13.90% respectively, and the rates of decreased vision were 31.25%, 48.18% and 59.19% respectively. There was a significant difference in the rate of vision loss between the single approach prevention method (40.00%) and the composite approach prevention approach (19.42%) (P <0.01). Conclusions The new prevention method has good prevention and control effects on both primary and secondary school students.