Literature DB >> 3661674

Automatic infrared refractors--a comparative study.

W Wesemann1, B Rassow.   

Abstract

In order to determine the performance of seven automatic infrared (IR) eye refractors, measurements have been conducted on a model eye as well as on normal subjects and patients under standardized conditions. Concerning the model eye, a range of measurement slightly smaller than specified and linearity errors have been detected on several instruments. Using a group of 55 normal ametropic subjects, the results of the automatic refraction were compared to the results of a conventional subjective examination. The spherical equivalent differed by less than 0.51 D in more than 80% of all cases on all instruments. The error of the cylinder power was smaller than 0.51 D in more than 90% of all cases. Larger errors were found on patients with intra ocular lenses, aphakic eyes, or scattering eye media. In each of these groups the automatic refraction was at times either impossible or yielded a wrong result.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3661674     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-198708000-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Optom Physiol Opt        ISSN: 0093-7002


  9 in total

1.  Objective autorefraction in posterior chamber pseudophakia.

Authors:  P S Raj; T Akingbehin; A M Levy
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Non-cycloplegic spherical equivalent refraction in adults: comparison of the double-pass system, retinoscopy, subjective refraction and a table-mounted autorefractor.

Authors:  Meritxell Vilaseca; Montserrat Arjona; Jaume Pujol; Elvira Peris; Vanessa Martínez
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Clinical evaluation of automated refraction in anterior chamber pseudophakia.

Authors:  P Sunder Raj; J R Villada; K Myint; A E Lewis; T Akingbehin
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  [Agreement of subjective and objective refraction measurements following INTRACOR femtosecond laser treatment].

Authors:  A Fitting; A Ehmer; T M Rabsilber; G U Auffarth; M P Holzer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Comparison of photorefraction, autorefractometry and retinoscopy in children.

Authors:  Goktug Demirci; Banu Arslan; Mustafa Özsütçü; Mustafa Eliaçık; Gokhan Gulkilik
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 2.031

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.  Clinical evaluation of the Allergan Humphrey 500 autorefractor and the Nidek AR-1000 autorefractor.

Authors:  B Kinge; A Midelfart; G Jacobsen
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.638

8.  Trial frame refraction versus autorefraction among new patients in a low-vision clinic.

Authors:  Dawn K DeCarlo; Gerald McGwin; Karen Searcey; Liyan Gao; Marsha Snow; John Waterbor; Cynthia Owsley
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.