Literature DB >> 26541436

Cycloplegic autorefraction versus subjective refraction: the Tehran Eye Study.

Hassan Hashemi1, Mehdi Khabazkhoob1, Amir Asharlous2, Sara Soroush2, AbbasAli Yekta3, Nooshin Dadbin2, Akbar Fotouhi4.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare cycloplegic autorefraction with non-cycloplegic subjective refraction across all age and refractive error groups.
METHODS: In a cross-sectional study with random stratified cluster sampling, 160 clusters were chosen from various districts proportionate to the population of each district in Tehran. Following retinoscopy and autorefraction with the 0.25 D bracketing (Topcon KR-8000, Topcon, Tokyo, Japan), all participants had a subjective refraction. Then all participants underwent cycloplegic autorefraction.
RESULTS: The final analysis was performed on 3482 participants with a mean age of 31.7 years (range 5-92 years). Based on cycloplegic and subjective refraction, mean spherical equivalent (SE) was +0.31±1.80 and -0.32±1.61 D, respectively (p<0.001). The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) between these two types of refraction were from -0.40 to 1.70 D. The largest difference between these two types of refraction was seen in the age group of 5-10 years (1.11±0.60 D), and the smallest difference was in the age group of >70 years (0.34±0.45 D). The 95% LoA was -0.52 to 0.89 D in patients with myopia and -0.12 to 2.04 D in patients with hyperopia. We found that female gender (coefficients=0.048), older age (coefficients=-0.247), higher education (coefficients=-0.043) and cycloplegic SE (coefficients=-0.472) significantly correlated with lower intermethod differences.
CONCLUSIONS: The cycloplegic refraction is more sensitive than the subjective one to measure refractive error at all age groups especially in children and young adults. The cyclorefraction technique is highly recommended to exactly measure the refractive error in momentous conditions such as refractive surgery, epidemiological researches and amblyopia therapy, especially in hypermetropic eyes and paediatric cases. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

Entities:  

Keywords:  Optics and Refraction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26541436     DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  17 in total

1.  Early life factors for myopia in the British Twins Early Development Study.

Authors:  Katie M Williams; Eva Kraphol; Ekaterina Yonova-Doing; Pirro G Hysi; Robert Plomin; Christopher J Hammond
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Validity of automated refraction after segmented refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation.

Authors:  César Albarrán-Diego; Gonzalo Muñoz; Stephanie Rohrweck; Santiago García-Lázaro; José Ricardo Albero
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-11-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Incidence of and Factors Associated With Myopia and High Myopia in Chinese Children, Based on Refraction Without Cycloplegia.

Authors:  Sean K Wang; Yangfeng Guo; Chimei Liao; Yanxian Chen; Guangxing Su; Guohui Zhang; Lei Zhang; Mingguang He
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 7.389

4.  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

5.  Comparison of Refractive Measures of Three Autorefractors in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Shuyu Xiong; Minzhi Lv; Haidong Zou; Jianfeng Zhu; Lina Lu; Bo Zhang; Junjie Deng; Chunxia Yao; Xiangui He; Xun Xu
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.973

6.  Design, methodology, and baseline data of the Personalized Addition Lenses Clinical Trial (PACT).

Authors:  Xinping Yu; Binjun Zhang; Jinhua Bao; Junxiao Zhang; Ge Wu; Jinling Xu; Jingwei Zheng; Björn Drobe; Hao Chen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  Phenotypic and genotypic correlation between myopia and intelligence.

Authors:  Katie M Williams; Pirro G Hysi; Ekaterina Yonova-Doing; Omar A Mahroo; Harold Snieder; Christopher J Hammond
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  A randomized clinical trial using cyclopentolate and tropicamide to compare cycloplegic refraction in Chinese young adults with dark irises.

Authors:  Ruxia Pei; Zhuzhu Liu; Hua Rong; Liqiong Zhao; Bei Du; Na Jin; Hongmei Zhang; Biying Wang; Yi Pang; Ruihua Wei
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 2.209

9.  Prediction of myopia onset with refractive error measured using non-cycloplegic subjective refraction: the WEPrOM Study.

Authors:  Yee Ling Wong; Yimin Yuan; Binbin Su; Shezad Tufail; Yang Ding; Yingying Ye; Damien Paille; Björn Drobe; Hao Chen; Jinhua Bao
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-09

10.  The associations of high academic performance with childhood ametropia prevalence and myopia development in China.

Authors:  Yahan Yang; Ruiyang Li; Daniel Ting; Xiaohang Wu; Jialing Huang; Yi Zhu; Chuan Chen; Bingsen Lin; Sijin Li; Xinliang Zhang; Kexin Chen; Tongyong Yu; Dongxuan Wu; Zijun Mo; Hongxi Wang; Shiqun Li; Haotian Lin
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.