Literature DB >> 19523087

Cycloplegic refraction in preschool children: comparisons between the hand-held autorefractor, table-mounted autorefractor and retinoscopy.

S Prabakaran1, M Dirani, A Chia, G Gazzard, Q Fan, S-W Leo, Y Ling, K-G Au Eong, T-Y Wong, S-M Saw.   

Abstract

AIMS: It is common for refraction to be measured using different testing methods in children, with much debate still ongoing on the preferred method. Therefore, we compared cycloplegic refraction measurements using three objective methods in a large cohort of children.
METHODS: We present the findings from a total of 51 children who were recruited and examined as part of the Strabismus, Amblyopia and Refractive error in Singapore preschool children (STARS) study. Each child underwent a comprehensive eye examination, which included cycloplegic refraction using a hand-held autorefractor (Retinomax), a table mounted autorefractor (Canon FK-1) and streak retinoscopy. Spherical equivalent (SE) was calculated as (sphere + half of minus cylinder) and astigmatism was determined using the negative cylindrical component.
RESULTS: The current study sample consisted of 29 boys and 22 girls aged between 24 and 72 months (mean age 52.3 months). The mean spherical equivalent (SE) using the table-mounted autorefractor (1.03 +/- 1.64 D) was not significantly different from the streak retinoscopy (1.09 +/- 1.58 D, p = 0.66). However, the mean SE using the hand-held Retinomax (0.80 +/- 1.43 D) was significantly different (more 'minus'p = 0.0004) to streak retinoscopy. The astigmatism measured using the hand held (-0.89 +/- 0.51 D) and table-mounted autorefractor (-0.83 +/- 0.61 D) were significantly greater than that obtained with streak retinoscopy (-0.58 +/- 0.56, p = 0.0003).
CONCLUSIONS: The table-mounted autorefractor provided a reading more similar to that of streak retinoscopy than to that of the hand-held autorefractor. However, there were only small differences in mean SE (<0.32 D) between the hand-held Retinomax and the other methods, which will have implications in research investigations of refractive error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19523087     DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00616.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt        ISSN: 0275-5408            Impact factor:   3.117


  23 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.  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.  Family history, near work, outdoor activity, and myopia in Singapore Chinese preschool children.

Authors:  Wilson Low; Mohamed Dirani; Gus Gazzard; Yiong-Huak Chan; Hui-Jun Zhou; Prabakaran Selvaraj; Kah-Guan Au Eong; Terri L Young; Paul Mitchell; Tien-Yin Wong; Seang-Mei Saw
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 4.  Clinical application of accommodating intraocular lens.

Authors:  You-Ling Liang; Song-Bai Jia
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Comparison of photorefraction, autorefractometry and retinoscopy in children.

Authors:  Goktug Demirci; Banu Arslan; Mustafa Özsütçü; Mustafa Eliaçık; Gokhan Gulkilik
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 2.031

6.  Correction of refractive errors in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) involved in visual research.

Authors:  Jude F Mitchell; Chantal J Boisvert; Jon D Reuter; John H Reynolds; Mathias Leblanc
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 0.982

7.  Prevalence, Characteristics, and Risk Factors of Moderate or High Hyperopia among Multiethnic Children 6 to 72 Months of Age: A Pooled Analysis of Individual Participant Data.

Authors:  Xuejuan Jiang; Kristina Tarczy-Hornoch; Douglas Stram; Joanne Katz; David S Friedman; James M Tielsch; Saiko Matsumura; Seang-Mei Saw; Paul Mitchell; Kathryn A Rose; Susan A Cotter; Rohit Varma
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Prevalence of refractive error in Singaporean Chinese children: the strabismus, amblyopia, and refractive error in young Singaporean Children (STARS) study.

Authors:  Mohamed Dirani; Yiong-Huak Chan; Gus Gazzard; Dana Marie Hornbeak; Seo-Wei Leo; Prabakaran Selvaraj; Brendan Zhou; Terri L Young; Paul Mitchell; Rohit Varma; Tien Yin Wong; Seang-Mei Saw
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  Comparison of the Retinomax hand-held autorefractor versus table-top autorefractor and retinoscopy.

Authors:  Ibrahim Tuncer; Mehmet Ozgur Zengin; Eyyup Karahan
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

10.  Association of Parental Myopia With Higher Risk of Myopia Among Multiethnic Children Before School Age.

Authors:  Xuejuan Jiang; Kristina Tarczy-Hornoch; Susan A Cotter; Saiko Matsumura; Paul Mitchell; Kathryn A Rose; Joanne Katz; Seang-Mei Saw; Rohit Varma
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 7.389

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.