Literature DB >> 24114503

Comparison of photorefraction, autorefractometry and retinoscopy in children.

Goktug Demirci1, Banu Arslan, Mustafa Özsütçü, Mustafa Eliaçık, Gokhan Gulkilik.   

Abstract

Photorefractive devices have been evaluated for their effectiveness in detecting anisometropia, hyperopia, myopia, and astigmatism. We investigated the reliability of Plusoptix S08, the newest photoscreener, and Topcon autorefractometer by comparing them with cycloplegic retinoscopy. Plusoptix S08, cycloplegic retinoscopy, and cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements for 235 eyes of 118 children (59 female, 59 male) with a mean age of 4.9 ± 2.6 and median age of 5 years (range 1-12) were conducted. The Plusoptix S08 produced the following mean (± SD) results--spherical 0.27 ± 1.64, cylindrical power -0.81 ± 0.71, axis 89.73 ± 61.18, and spherical equivalent -0.05 ± 1.61. The cycloplegic retinoscopy produced the following mean (± SD) results--spherical 0.12 ± 1.35, cylindrical power -0.89 ± 0.71, axis 92.18 ± 68.39, and spherical equivalent -0.15 ± 1.31. The cycloplegic autorefractometer produced the following mean (± SD) results--spherical 0.16 ± 1.44, cylindrical power -0.88 ± 0.72, axis 90.86 ± 68.21, and spherical equivalent -0.12 ± 1.41. This study has shown that cycloplegic autorefractometer and retinoscopy results are similar and Plusoptix S08 is a very safe, easy-to-use and reliable screening method of refraction, especially for ophthalmologists unskilled in retinoscopy. Plusoptix S08 is a useful tool for estimating refraction in patients for whom conventional autorefraction is not an option.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24114503     DOI: 10.1007/s10792-013-9864-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0165-5701            Impact factor:   2.031


  29 in total

1.  Accuracy and accommodation capability of a handheld autorefractor.

Authors:  W Wesemann; B Dick
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Preschool vision screening: what should we be detecting and how should we report it? Uniform guidelines for reporting results of preschool vision screening studies.

Authors:  Sean P Donahue; Robert W Arnold; James B Ruben
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.220

3.  Risk of bilateral visual impairment in individuals with amblyopia: the Rotterdam study.

Authors:  Redmer van Leeuwen; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Johannes R Vingerling; Albert Hofman; Paulus T V M de Jong; Huib J Simonsz
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-05-23       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Use of visual acuity to screen for significant refractive errors in adolescents: is it reliable?

Authors:  Jody Fay Leone; Paul Mitchell; Ian George Morgan; Annette Kifley; Kathryn Ailsa Rose
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-07

5.  Automatic infrared refractors--a comparative study.

Authors:  W Wesemann; B Rassow
Journal:  Am J Optom Physiol Opt       Date:  1987-08

6.  Accuracy of a new photo-refractometer in young and adult patients.

Authors:  Thilo Schimitzek; Wolf A Lagrèze
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-01-14       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Validation of plusoptiX S04 photoscreener as a vision screening tool in children with intellectual disability.

Authors:  Silay Canturk Ugurbas; Atilla Alpay; Huseyin Tutar; Haci Murat Sagdik; Suat Hayri Ugurbas
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.220

8.  The Rotterdam AMblyopia Screening Effectiveness Study (RAMSES): compliance and predictive value in the first 2 years.

Authors:  R Juttmann
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  Clinical evaluation of refraction using a handheld wavefront autorefractor in young and adult patients.

Authors:  Thilo Schimitzek; Wolfgang Wesemann
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.351

10.  Performance of the Plusoptix vision screener for the detection of amblyopia risk factors in children.

Authors:  Noelle S Matta; Eric L Singman; David I Silbert
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 1.220

View more
  9 in total

1.  Prevalence of and factors associated with myopia in primary school students in the Chaoyang District of Beijing, China.

Authors:  Yanyu Lyu; Hao Zhang; Yueqiu Gong; Dan Wang; Ting Chen; Xianghui Guo; Suhong Yang; Danyan Liu; Meixia Kang
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  Agreement Between Retinoscopy, Autorefractometry and Subjective Refraction for Determining Refractive Errors in Congolese Children.

Authors:  Sabrina N Mukash; David L Kayembe; Jean-Claude Mwanza
Journal:  Clin Optom (Auckl)       Date:  2021-04-21

3.  Tribal Odisha Eye Disease Study # 4: Accuracy and utility of photorefraction for refractive error correction in tribal Odisha (India) school screening.

Authors:  Sandeep Reddy; Lapam Panda; Anjul Kumar; Suryasmita Nayak; Taraprasad Das
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.848

4.  Comparison of Autorefraction and Photorefraction with and without Cycloplegia Using 1% Tropicamide in Preschool Children.

Authors:  Ertuğrul Tan Yassa; Cihan Ünlü
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 1.909

5.  Deep Learning-Based Prediction of Refractive Error Using Photorefraction Images Captured by a Smartphone: Model Development and Validation Study.

Authors:  Jaehyeong Chun; Youngjun Kim; Kyoung Yoon Shin; Sun Hyup Han; Sei Yeul Oh; Tae-Young Chung; Kyung-Ah Park; Dong Hui Lim
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2020-05-05

6.  Accuracy of Photorefraction and Wavefront-Based Autorefraction in Children Under 3 Years of Age.

Authors:  Caner Kara; Ikbal Seza Petricli
Journal:  Beyoglu Eye J       Date:  2021-02-13

7.  Deep learning for predicting refractive error from multiple photorefraction images.

Authors:  Daoliang Xu; Shangshang Ding; Tianli Zheng; Xingshuai Zhu; Zhiheng Gu; Bin Ye; Weiwei Fu
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.903

8.  Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision Screening™ and subjective clinical refractometry.

Authors:  Daniela Lima de Jesus; Flávio Fernandes Villela; Luis Fernando Orlandin; Fernando Naves Eiji; Daniel Oliveira Dantas; Milton Ruiz Alves
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.365

9.  Comparison of Plusoptix S12R photoscreener with cycloplegic retinoscopy and autorefraction in pediatric age group.

Authors:  Varun Saini; Usha K Raina; Anika Gupta; Jawahar Lal Goyal; Raffat Anjum; Pallavi Saini; Shantanu Kumar Gupta; Prateeksha Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.848

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.