Literature DB >> 10623951

How accurate is the hand-held refractor Retinomax(R) in measuring cycloplegic refraction: a further evaluation.

.   

Abstract

AIMS To assess the agreement between the hand-held autorefractor Retinomax(R) and three different on-table autorefractors when measuring cycloplegic refraction in subjects with small and high ametropia. To assess the agreement between the cycloplegic refraction using the Retinomax(R) and by retinoscopy in children with small and high ametropia. METHODS Part A.276 subjects were refracted under cycloplegia using both the Retinomax(R) and an on-table infrared automated refractor (Topcon RM-A 6000, Nidek AR 800 or Nikon NR 5000). They were separated into subjects withsmall ametropia (mean sphere </= 3.5 D hyperopia, </= 3 D myopia) and high ametropia (mean sphere > 3.5 D hyperopia, > 3 D myopia). The agreement between both types of refractors regarding the different refractive components was assessed for the whole group and for the two subgroups of small and high ametropia. Part B. 48 infants were refracted under cycloplegia by retinoscopy and by the Retinomax(R). The agreement between both methods of refraction was analyzed in the same manner as in part A. RESULTS Part A. No significant bias was found between the two types of refractors with regard to the spherical equivalent. The 95% limits of agreement were +/- 1 D. Although no clinically significant bias was found with regard to the cylinder power in the 276 subjects, it was found that the 95% limits of agreement were much better (+/- 0.75 D) in small ametropia subjects than in high ametropia subjects (-2.1 to +1.3 D). No significant bias was found with regard to the axis determination. Part B. No significant bias was found between the Retinomax(R) and retinoscopic measurements with regard to the spherical equivalent. The 95% limits of agreement were -1.36 to +1.76 D. However, the mean difference for spheres and cylinders showed a positive bias and a negative bias, respectively, suggesting more positive spheres and larger cylinders when measured by the Retinomax(R) compared to retinoscopy. This was particularly obvious in cases of high ametropia. CONCLUSION Compared to retinoscopy and on-table autorefraction, the hand-held refractor Retinomax(R) is accurate in any ametropia with respect to the spherical equivalent. In small ametropia, there is a good accuracy when measuring the three refractive components (sphere, cylinder and axis). The accuracy decreases in high ametropia, especially with regard to the cylinder power.

Entities:  

Year:  1998        PMID: 10623951     DOI: 10.1076/stra.6.3.133.661

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Strabismus        ISSN: 0927-3972


  11 in total

1.  Comparison of the Retinomax and Palm-AR Auto-Refractors: a pilot study.

Authors:  Elise Ciner; Ashanti Carter; Gui-Shuang Ying; Maureen Maguire; Marjean Taylor Kulp
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.973

2.  [Examination of preschool children for refractive errors. First experience using a handheld autorefractor].

Authors:  T F Büchner; U Schnorbus; U H Grenzebach; T Stupp; H Busse
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Change of refractive state and eye size in children of birth weight less than 1701 g.

Authors:  A R O'Connor; T J Stephenson; A Johnson; M J Tobin; S Ratib; A R Fielder
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Study on accommodation by autorefraction and dynamic refraction in children.

Authors:  Prabhakar Srinivasapur Krishnacharya
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-08-15

5.  Screening for refractive errors in children: accuracy of the hand held refractor Retinomax to screen for astigmatism.

Authors:  M Cordonnier; M Dramaix
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Comparison of cycloplegic refraction between Grand Seiko autorefractor and Retinomax autorefractor in the Vision in Preschoolers-Hyperopia in Preschoolers (VIP-HIP) Study.

Authors:  Gui-Shuang Ying; Maureen G Maguire; Marjean Taylor Kulp; Elise Ciner; Bruce Moore; Maxwell Pistilli; Rowan Candy
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 1.220

7.  Utility of an open field Shack-Hartmann aberrometer for measurement of refractive error in infants and young children.

Authors:  Erin M Harvey; Joseph M Miller; Jim Schwiegerling
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.220

8.  Trial frame refraction versus autorefraction among new patients in a low-vision clinic.

Authors:  Dawn K DeCarlo; Gerald McGwin; Karen Searcey; Liyan Gao; Marsha Snow; John Waterbor; Cynthia Owsley
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  Comparison of the refractive measurements with hand-held autorefractometer, table-mounted autorefractometer and cycloplegic retinoscopy in children.

Authors:  Handan Akil; Soner Keskin; Cemal Çavdarli
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-05-20

10.  Repeatability of ARK-30 in a pediatric population.

Authors:  Laura Hernandez-Moreno; Ana Vallelado-Alvarez; Raul Martin
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.848

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.