H-J Grein1, O Schmidt, A Ritsche. 1. Fachhochschule Lübeck, Mönkhofer Weg 239, 23562, Lübeck, Deutschland, grein@fh-luebeck.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement is limited by various factors. The main factors affecting reproducibility include the characteristics of the measurement method and of the subject and the examiner. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article presents the results of a study on this topic, focusing on the reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement in healthy eyes. The results of previous studies are not all presented in the same way by the respective authors and cannot be fully standardized without consulting the original scientific data. To the extent that they are comparable, the results of our study largely correspond largely with those of previous investigations: During repeated subjective refraction measurement, 95% of the deviation from the mean value was approximately ±0.2 D to ±0.65 D for the spherical equivalent and cylindrical power. The reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement in healthy eyes is limited, even under ideal conditions. CONCLUSION: Correct assessment of refraction results is only feasible after identifying individual variability. Several measurements are required. Refraction cannot be measured without a tolerance range. The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under supplemental).
BACKGROUND: Reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement is limited by various factors. The main factors affecting reproducibility include the characteristics of the measurement method and of the subject and the examiner. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article presents the results of a study on this topic, focusing on the reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement in healthy eyes. The results of previous studies are not all presented in the same way by the respective authors and cannot be fully standardized without consulting the original scientific data. To the extent that they are comparable, the results of our study largely correspond largely with those of previous investigations: During repeated subjective refraction measurement, 95% of the deviation from the mean value was approximately ±0.2 D to ±0.65 D for the spherical equivalent and cylindrical power. The reproducibility of subjective refraction measurement in healthy eyes is limited, even under ideal conditions. CONCLUSION: Correct assessment of refraction results is only feasible after identifying individual variability. Several measurements are required. Refraction cannot be measured without a tolerance range. The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under supplemental).
Authors: Cassia Garcia Moraes Pagano; Tais de Campos Moreira; Daniel Sganzerla; Ana Maria Frölich Matzenbacher; Amanda Gomes Faria; Lucas Matturro; Felipe Cezar Cabral; Dimitris Rucks Varvaki Rados; Anelise Decavata Szortyka; Maicon Falavigna; Maria Eulalia Vinadé Chagas; Erno Harzheim; Marcelo Gonçalves; Roberto Umpierre; Aline Lutz de Araujo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jascha A Wendelstein; Peter C Hoffmann; Siegfried Mariacher; Tina Wingert; Nino Hirnschall; Oliver Findl; Matthias Bolz Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2021-02-24 Impact factor: 3.988