Ibrahim Tuncer1, Mehmet Ozgur Zengin2, Eyyup Karahan1. 1. Alfagoz Eye Center, Balcova 35330, Izmir, Turkey. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Izmir University Faculty of Medicine, Karsiyaka 35510, Izmir, Turkey.
Abstract
AIM: To compare noncycloplegic and cycloplegic results of Retinomax measurements with findings achieved after cycloplegia using table-top autorefractor and retinoscopy. METHODS: The study included 127 patients (mean age 96.7mo, range 21 to 221). Retinomax (Rmax) (Nikon Inc., Japan) was used to obtain noncycloplegic refraction. Under cycloplegia, refraction was measured with Rmax, table-top autorefractor (TTR) (Nikon NRK 8000, Inc., Japan) and retinoscopy. The values of sphere, spherical equivalent, cylinder and axis of cylinder were recorded for Rmax, TTR and retinoscopy in each eye. All results were analyzed statistically. RESULTS: THE MEAN SPHERIC VALUES (SV), SPHERICAL EQUIVALENT VALUES (SEV) AND CYLINDRICAL VALUES (CV) OF THE NONCYCLOPLEGIC RMAX (SV: 0.64 D, SEV: 0.65 D and CV: 0.03 D, respectively) were found to be significantly lower than cycloplegic TTR (1.43 D, 1.38 D and 0.3 D; P=0.012, P=0.011 and P=0.04, respectively) and retinoscopy (1.34 D, 1.45 D and 0.23 D; P=0.04, P=0.002 and P=0.045, respectively). Mean cycloplegic SV, SEV, CV were not significantly different between Rmax and TTR, Rmax and retinoscopy, TTR and retinoscopy. Cycloplegic or noncycloplegic axis values were not different between any method. CONCLUSION: Rmax may be used successfully as a screening tool but may not be accurate enough for actual spectacle prescription. Cycloplegic Rmax measurements may be able to identify refractive error in children because of approximate results to retinoscopy.
AIM: To compare noncycloplegic and cycloplegic results of Retinomax measurements with findings achieved after cycloplegia using table-top autorefractor and retinoscopy. METHODS: The study included 127 patients (mean age 96.7mo, range 21 to 221). Retinomax (Rmax) (Nikon Inc., Japan) was used to obtain noncycloplegic refraction. Under cycloplegia, refraction was measured with Rmax, table-top autorefractor (TTR) (Nikon NRK 8000, Inc., Japan) and retinoscopy. The values of sphere, spherical equivalent, cylinder and axis of cylinder were recorded for Rmax, TTR and retinoscopy in each eye. All results were analyzed statistically. RESULTS: THE MEAN SPHERIC VALUES (SV), SPHERICAL EQUIVALENT VALUES (SEV) AND CYLINDRICAL VALUES (CV) OF THE NONCYCLOPLEGIC RMAX (SV: 0.64 D, SEV: 0.65 D and CV: 0.03 D, respectively) were found to be significantly lower than cycloplegic TTR (1.43 D, 1.38 D and 0.3 D; P=0.012, P=0.011 and P=0.04, respectively) and retinoscopy (1.34 D, 1.45 D and 0.23 D; P=0.04, P=0.002 and P=0.045, respectively). Mean cycloplegic SV, SEV, CV were not significantly different between Rmax and TTR, Rmax and retinoscopy, TTR and retinoscopy. Cycloplegic or noncycloplegic axis values were not different between any method. CONCLUSION: Rmax may be used successfully as a screening tool but may not be accurate enough for actual spectacle prescription. Cycloplegic Rmax measurements may be able to identify refractive error in children because of approximate results to retinoscopy.
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
Authors: A H Dahlmann-Noor; K Vrotsou; V Kostakis; J Brown; J Heath; A Iron; S McGill; A J Vivian Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2008-11-19 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Robert W Arnold; Samuel J Martin; Joshua R Beveridge; Andrew W Arnold; Stephanie L Arnold; Nathanael R Beveridge; Kyle A Smith Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2021-08-30
Authors: Ana M Calvo-Maroto; Sara Llorente-González; Jaione Bezunartea-Bezunartea; Francisco Javier Hurtado-Ceña; Clara Berrozpe-Villabona; Valentina Bilbao-Malavé; David P Piñero; Jesús Barrio-Barrio; Sergio Recalde-Maestre Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2022-01-09