OBJECTIVE: To compare refraction measurements of young patients obtained using Plusoptix S04 with those obtained using cycloplegic retinoscopy. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from 64 patients (128 eyes), aged 2-19 years. METHODS: All eyes underwent photorefraction using Plusoptix S04 with or without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy. Eyes with a maximum spherical and cylinder range of 7.00 to +5.00 were excluded from the study. RESULTS: The difference in spherical equivalents between Plusoptix S04 without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was more than ±0.50 D in 70.2% of the eyes. In 100 eyes (78.1%), photorefraction underestimated the hyperopic refractive error. The cylinder powers determined by Plusoptix S04 and cycloplegic retinoscopy were similar. The difference in the spherical equivalents between Plusoptix S04 with cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was ±0.50 D in 89.8% of the eyes. In 96 eyes (75%), photorefraction with cycloplegia overestimated the hyperopic refractive error. The difference in cylindrical power determined using Plusoptix S04 with cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was statistically significant (paired t test, p <0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The statistically significant difference in spherical equivalent values obtained using Plusoptix S04 with or without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy suggests that Plusoptix S04 is more in evaluating the cylinder power and axis in young patients. Our results also suggest that Plusoptix S04 is not an accurate tool to estimate the refraction in children.
OBJECTIVE: To compare refraction measurements of young patients obtained using Plusoptix S04 with those obtained using cycloplegic retinoscopy. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from 64 patients (128 eyes), aged 2-19 years. METHODS: All eyes underwent photorefraction using Plusoptix S04 with or without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy. Eyes with a maximum spherical and cylinder range of 7.00 to +5.00 were excluded from the study. RESULTS: The difference in spherical equivalents between Plusoptix S04 without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was more than ±0.50 D in 70.2% of the eyes. In 100 eyes (78.1%), photorefraction underestimated the hyperopic refractive error. The cylinder powers determined by Plusoptix S04 and cycloplegic retinoscopy were similar. The difference in the spherical equivalents between Plusoptix S04 with cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was ±0.50 D in 89.8% of the eyes. In 96 eyes (75%), photorefraction with cycloplegia overestimated the hyperopic refractive error. The difference in cylindrical power determined using Plusoptix S04 with cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy was statistically significant (paired t test, p <0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The statistically significant difference in spherical equivalent values obtained using Plusoptix S04 with or without cycloplegia and cycloplegic retinoscopy suggests that Plusoptix S04 is more in evaluating the cylinder power and axis in young patients. Our results also suggest that Plusoptix S04 is not an accurate tool to estimate the refraction in children.