Literature DB >> 31107837

Clinical Accuracy of the Nidek ARK-1 Autorefractor.

Nabin Paudel1, Sameep Adhikari1, Ajit Thakur1, Bhairaja Shrestha1, James Loughman2.   

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE: Autorefractors are commonly used by eye care practitioners worldwide as a starting point for clinical prescribing and by researchers as an instrument to study development of refractive errors and accommodation. This study demonstrates that the Nidek ARK-1 provides a reasonable and repeatable estimate of refractive error.
PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were (a) to compare refraction measurements of the Nidek ARK-1 (2016 release) autorefractor with that of subjective refraction and retinoscopy performed by an experienced clinician and (b) to determine the intratest and intertest variability of autorefraction measures taken using the ARK-1 autorefractor.
METHODS: Sixty-seven adult patients aged 18 to 69 years underwent retinoscopy, subjective refraction, and ARK-1 autorefraction on a same day by a single clinician. A separate subset of 14 participants was invited for the repeatability and reproducibility study. Both eyes of each participant were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: A statistically significant (but not clinically significant) positive spherical difference was observed between the ARK-1 and subjective refraction (P = .003). Spherical equivalent refractive errors were statistically similar between the ARK-1 and subjective refraction (P = .20). A statistically and clinically significant difference was observed in the cylindrical component between the ARK and subjective refraction (P < .01). No statistically significant difference was observed between the ARK and subjective refraction in both the horizontal (J0; P = .08) and oblique cylindrical vector (J45; P = .96). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that the 95% limits of agreement were widest between the ARK and subjective refraction in all of the refractive components (-0.60 to 0.89 diopter for spherical component, -0.80 to 0.69 diopter for spherical equivalent, and -0.98 to 0.30 diopter for cylindrical component). The intertest and intratest variability of the ARK-1 was small.
CONCLUSIONS: The Nidek ARK-1 autorefractor is a useful clinical tool that provides a reasonable and repeatable estimation of refractive error in adults.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31107837     DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  6 in total

1.  Myopia in Bulgarian school children: prevalence, risk factors, and health care coverage.

Authors:  Mila Dragomirova; Albena Antonova; Slavena Stoykova; Gergana Mihova; Denitsa Grigorova
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-04       Impact factor: 2.086

2.  Repeatability of Aberrometry-Based Automated Subjective Refraction in Healthy and Keratoconus Subjects.

Authors:  Gonzalo Carracedo; Carlos Carpena-Torres; Cristina Pastrana; Ana Privado-Aroco; María Serramito; Laura Batres
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 1.909

3.  Genetic pre-screening for glaucoma in population-based epidemiology: protocol for a double-blind prospective screening study within Lifelines (EyeLife).

Authors:  Anna Neustaeter; Ilja Nolte; Harold Snieder; Nomdo M Jansonius
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.209

4.  Does the Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Estimates Depend on the Measurement Principle of Autorefractors?

Authors:  Debananda Padhy; Shrikant R Bharadwaj; Suryasmita Nayak; Suryasnata Rath; Taraprasad Das
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 3.283

Review 5.  Portable hardware & software technologies for addressing ophthalmic health disparities: A systematic review.

Authors:  Margarita Labkovich; Megan Paul; Eliott Kim; Randal A Serafini; Shreyas Lakhtakia; Aly A Valliani; Andrew J Warburton; Aashay Patel; Davis Zhou; Bonnie Sklar; James Chelnis; Ebrahim Elahi
Journal:  Digit Health       Date:  2022-05-06

6.  Comparison of Two Wavefront Autorefractors: Binocular Open-Field versus Monocular Closed-Field.

Authors:  Gonzalo Carracedo; Carlos Carpena-Torres; Laura Batres; Maria Serramito; Anahí Gonzalez-Bergaz
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 1.909

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.