Literature DB >> 12637836

Repeatability and validity of the PowerRefractor and the Nidek AR600-A in an adult population with healthy eyes.

Peter M Allen1, Hema Radhakrishnan, Daniel J O'Leary.   

Abstract

We assessed the repeatability and validity of the PowerRefractor and the Nidek AR-600A autorefractor. This is the first independent study conducted on adults to evaluate the performance of these instruments in a laboratory setting. Fifty subjects (23 males and 27 females) aged 16 to 61 years (mean, 37 +/- 12) participated in the study. The validity of the PowerRefractor and the Nidek autorefractor readings were determined by comparing them to subjective refraction. Measurements of refractive error were obtained from the two instruments on two separate occasions to assess their repeatability. The measured refractive error was converted into a dioptric power matrix for data analysis. No significant difference was found between the measurements obtained with the two instruments and the subjective refraction. The estimate of refractive error given by the two instruments was also found to be repeatable. In addition to measuring the refractive error, the PowerRefractor also offers the facility to measure eye position, pupil size, and dynamics of accommodation. We suggest some improvements to the PowerRefractor measurement technique to standardize its clinical use and to improve accuracy.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12637836     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-200303000-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  26 in total

1.  Linear relationship of refractive and biometric lenticular changes during accommodation in emmetropic and myopic eyes.

Authors:  Matthias Bolz; Ana Prinz; Wolfgang Drexler; Oliver Findl
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-10-18       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Human infants' accommodation responses to dynamic stimuli.

Authors:  Grazyna M Tondel; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  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

4.  [Agreement of subjective and objective refraction measurements following INTRACOR femtosecond laser treatment].

Authors:  A Fitting; A Ehmer; T M Rabsilber; G U Auffarth; M P Holzer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Quantification of age-related and per diopter accommodative changes of the lens and ciliary muscle in the emmetropic human eye.

Authors:  Kathryn Richdale; Loraine T Sinnott; Mark A Bullimore; Peter A Wassenaar; Petra Schmalbrock; Chiu-Yen Kao; Samuel Patz; Donald O Mutti; Adrian Glasser; Karla Zadnik
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Comparison between focometer and autorefractor in the measurement of refractive error among students in underserved community of sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  A S Aina; T S Oluleye; B A Olusanya
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.775

7.  Validation of the PowerRefractor for measuring human infant refraction.

Authors:  Pamela J Blade; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  Identifying visual stress during a routine eye examination.

Authors:  Laura Monger; Arnold Wilkins; Peter Allen
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-11-11

9.  Comparison of refractive assessment by wavefront aberrometry, autorefraction, and subjective refraction.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Bennett; Gina M Stalboerger; David O Hodge; Muriel M Schornack
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-12-11

10.  Receding and disparity cues aid relaxation of accommodation.

Authors:  Anna M Horwood; Patricia M Riddell
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.973

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.