Literature DB >> 11821210

Comparison of a ray-tracing refractometer, autorefractor, and computerized videokeratography in measuring pseudophakic eyes.

Li Wang1, Manjula Misra, Ioannis G Pallikaris, Douglas D Koch.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test the accuracy and reliability of the first-generation prototype of Tracey-1, a ray-tracing refractometer.
SETTING: Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
METHODS: The refractive spherical equivalent (SE) and astigmatism measured by Tracey-1, subjective manifest refraction (MR), and autorefraction (AR) (Nidek AR-3300) were compared in 58 pseudophakic eyes of 44 patients with a mean age of 69.95 years +/- 8.6 (SD). The astigmatic values obtained from Tracey-1 and computerized videokeratography were also compared. Astigmatism values were compared using power vector analysis.
RESULTS: The mean SEs measured by MR, Tracey, and AR were -0.76 diopter (D) +/- 0.96 (SD) (range 1.00 to -3.00 D), 0.37 +/- 0.64 D (range 1.68 to -1.49 D), and -0.44 +/- 1.13 D (range 1.63 to -3.50 D), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between MR and Tracey values and between MR and AR values were high (r = 0.895 and r = 0.875, respectively; both P < .0001). However, the mean difference between the Tracey and MR values was 1.13 +/- 0.48 D (range 2.45 to -0.06 D) (P < .001). The mean cylindrical differences between MR and Tracey and between MR and AR were 0.03 +/- 0.51 D (range 1.22 to -1.07 D) (P = .709) and -0.30 +/- 0.62 D (range 0.50 to -2.25 D) (P = .003), respectively. Power vector analysis revealed difference vectors of -0.16 x 60 between Tracey and MR and -0.22 x 87 between AR and MR.
CONCLUSIONS: Spherical and cylindrical refractive data obtained with the Tracey system correlated well with those derived from MR; however, there was a mean spherical error of approximately 1.10 D. Further work is required to refine the accuracy and range of this device.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11821210     DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(01)01103-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  4 in total

1.  Comparison of laser ray-tracing and skiascopic ocular wavefront-sensing devices.

Authors:  D-U G Bartsch; K Bessho; L Gomez; W R Freeman
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Non-cycloplegic spherical equivalent refraction in adults: comparison of the double-pass system, retinoscopy, subjective refraction and a table-mounted autorefractor.

Authors:  Meritxell Vilaseca; Montserrat Arjona; Jaume Pujol; Elvira Peris; Vanessa Martínez
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Evaluation of patient visual comfort and repeatability of refractive values in non-presbyopic healthy eyes.

Authors:  Francisco Segura; Ana Sanchez-Cano; Carmen Lopez de la Fuente; Lorena Fuentes-Broto; Isabel Pinilla
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  Ocular wavefront aberrations in patients with macular diseases.

Authors:  Kenichiro Bessho; Dirk-Uwe G Bartsch; Laura Gomez; Lingyun Cheng; Hyoung Jun Koh; William R Freeman
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.256

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.