A Comparison of Autorefraction and Subjective Refraction in an Academic Optometry Clinic

被引:3
|
作者
Kemchoknatee, Parinee [1 ]
Sunlakaviset, Pornlada [1 ]
Khieokhoen, Nattawat [1 ]
Srisombut, Thansit [1 ]
Tangon, Duanghathai [1 ]
机构
[1] Rangsit Univ, Rajavithi Hosp, Ophthalmol, Bangkok, Thailand
关键词
spherical equivalent; cylindrical power; spherical power; refraction; subjective refraction; autorefraction; autorefractor; REPEATABILITY; ERRORS; YOUNG;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.37448
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Refractive error is the most common cause of decreased visual acuity. Refractive measurement in adults consists of cycloplegic (objective) and manifest (subjective) refraction. Although the effectiveness of autorefraction is a crucial factor, there needs to be more information on its accuracy and precision on each autorefractor compared with subjective measurement in Thai patients.Objective: To compare the accuracy and precision of the two autorefractors' findings in Rajavithi Hospital, OptoChek Plus, and TOMEY Auto Refractometer RC-5000, with each other and with those of the subjective method.Materials & Methods: An observational study was conducted at the Ophthalmology clinic in Rajavithi Hospital from March 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022. All subjects were tested using the two autorefractors (OptoChek Plus and TOMEY Auto Refractometer RC-5000) and subjective refraction. One eye per subject was included in the study.Results: Forty-eight patients (48 eyes) were enrolled in the study. The difference between spherical powers obtained by OptoChek and subjective refraction was not significantly different; however, there was a significant difference between those calculated by Tomey and the subjective method (p=0.77, p=0.04 respectively). The variations between cylindrical powers arrived at by the two autorefraction techniques and those calculated by the subjective method were significantly different (OptoChek and Tomey p-=0.01, p-value<0.001, respectively). In addition, 95% of the limit of agreement (95% of LOA) was low in the cylindrical measurement of each autorefractor compared with subjective refraction. (84.61%, 86.36%, respectively). No statistically significant difference between the spherical equivalent calculated by the two autorefractors and that of subjective refraction was observed in the present study (OptoChek: p-value=0.26 and Tomey: p-value=0.77).Conclusions: There was a clinically significant difference between the cylindrical power calculated by the two autorefractors and those obtained from subjective refraction. Patients with high astigmatism should be monitored closely when measured by autorefractors, as there can be a slightly lower agreement between objective and subjective refraction.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] COMPARISON OF A NEW PROTOTYPE OF NETRA-G CELL PHONE-BASED REFRACTION WITH SUBJECTIVE REFRACTION
    Solaka, Nadine
    Modi, Rahul
    Gaiser, Hilary
    Pamplona, Vitor
    Schafran, David
    He, Ran
    Moore, Bruce D.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2014, 55 (13)
  • [42] Comparing the Netra smartphone refractor to subjective refraction
    Tousignant, Benoit
    Garceau, Marie-Christine
    Bouffard-Saint-Pierre, Nikola
    Bellemare, Marie-Maxime
    Hanssens, Jean-Marie
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPTOMETRY, 2020, 103 (04) : 501 - 506
  • [43] Comparative Study of Refraction between Wave Front-Based Refraction and Autorefraction without and with Cycloplegia in Children and Adolescents
    Calvo-Maroto, Ana M.
    Llorente-Gonzalez, Sara
    Bezunartea-Bezunartea, Jaione
    Hurtado-Cena, Francisco Javier
    Berrozpe-Villabona, Clara
    Bilbao-Malave, Valentina
    Pinero, David P.
    Barrio-Barrio, Jesus
    Recalde-Maestre, Sergio
    CHILDREN-BASEL, 2022, 9 (01):
  • [44] Repeatability of Subjective Refraction in Different Age Groups
    Carpena-Torres, Carlos
    Batres, Laura
    Serramito, Maria
    Carracedo, Gonzalo
    PHOTONICS, 2024, 11 (07)
  • [45] A Comparison Between Refraction From an Adaptive Optics Visual Simulator and Clinical Refractions
    Tabernero, Juan
    Otero, Carles
    Pardhan, Shahina
    TRANSLATIONAL VISION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 9 (07): : 1 - 9
  • [46] Agreement of subjective and objective refraction measurements following INTRACOR femtosecond laser treatment
    Fitting, A.
    Ehmer, A.
    Rabsilber, T. M.
    Auffarth, G. U.
    Holzer, M. P.
    OPHTHALMOLOGE, 2011, 108 (09): : 852 - 858
  • [47] Beyond traditional subjective refraction
    Rodriguez-Lopez, Victor
    Dorronsoro, Carlos
    CURRENT OPINION IN OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2022, 33 (03) : 228 - 234
  • [48] Reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement
    Grein, H-J
    Schmidt, O.
    Ritsche, A.
    OPHTHALMOLOGE, 2014, 111 (11): : 1057 - 1064
  • [49] Development of a subjective refraction simulator
    Perches, S.
    Ares, J.
    Collados, M. V.
    8TH IBEROAMERICAN OPTICS MEETING AND 11TH LATIN AMERICAN MEETING ON OPTICS, LASERS, AND APPLICATIONS, 2013, 8785
  • [50] Subjective refraction and prescribing styles used by UK optometrists
    Beesley, Jeremy
    Davey, Christopher J.
    Elliott, David B.
    OPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, 2025,