Outdoor Activity during Class Recess Reduces Myopia Onset and Progression in School Children
Outdoor Activity during Class Recess Reduces Myopia Onset and Progression in School Children
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.11.009
复制
发表时间：
2013-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
13.7
通讯作者：
Kuo, Hsi-Kung
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wu, Pei-Chang;Tsai, Chia-Ling;Kuo, Hsi-Kung
摘要目的：本研究旨在探讨课间户外活动对台湾郊区小学生近视变化的影响。设计：前瞻性、比较性、连续性、干预性研究。参与者：从台湾南部郊区附近的两所学校招募7至11岁的小学生。干预：一所学校的孩子参与干预，另一所学校的孩子作为对照组。干预措施包括实施课间休息（ROC）计划，鼓励孩子们在课间休息期间到户外活动。对照组学校在课间休息时没有任何特别的活动。主要结果测量：通过父母问卷和眼部评估获得数据，包括眼轴长度和开始和1年后的睫状体麻痹性自屈光。结果：本研究共招募571名学生，其中干预组333名，对照组238名。在研究开始时，两所学校在年龄、性别、基线屈光度和近视患病率方面无显著差异（47.75% vs 49.16%）。1年后，ROC组近视新发率显著低于对照组(8.41% vs. 17.65%
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of outdoor activity during class recess on myopia changes among elementary school students in a suburban area of Taiwan.Design: Prospective, comparative, consecutive, interventional study.Participants: Elementary school students 7 to 11 years of age recruited from 2 nearby schools located in a suburban area of southern Taiwan.Intervention: The children of one school participated in the interventions, whereas those from the other school served as the control group. The interventions consisted of performing a recess outside the classroom (ROC) program that encouraged children to go outside for outdoor activities during recess. The control school did not have any special programs during recess.Main Outcome Measures: Data were obtained by means of a parent questionnaire and ocular evaluations that included axial length and cycloplegic autorefraction at the beginning and after 1 year.Results: Five hundred seventy-one students were recruited for this study, of whom 333 students participated in the interventional program, and 238 students were in the control school. At the beginning of the study, there were no significant differences between these 2 schools with regard to age, gender, baseline refraction, and myopia prevalence (47.75% vs. 49.16%). After 1 year, new onset of myopia was significantly lower in the ROC group than in the control group (8.41% vs. 17.65%; P