Cargando…

Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of photorefraction and autorefraction as compared to cycloautorefraction and to detect the repeatability of photorefraction. METHODS: This diagnostic study included the right eyes of 86 children aged 7-12 years. Refractive status was measured using photorefraction...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rajavi, Zhale, Sabbaghi, Hamideh, Baghini, Ahmad Shojaei, Yaseri, Mehdi, Sheibani, Koroush, Norouzi, Ghazal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26730305
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.170360
_version_ 1782406596488331264
author Rajavi, Zhale
Sabbaghi, Hamideh
Baghini, Ahmad Shojaei
Yaseri, Mehdi
Sheibani, Koroush
Norouzi, Ghazal
author_facet Rajavi, Zhale
Sabbaghi, Hamideh
Baghini, Ahmad Shojaei
Yaseri, Mehdi
Sheibani, Koroush
Norouzi, Ghazal
author_sort Rajavi, Zhale
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of photorefraction and autorefraction as compared to cycloautorefraction and to detect the repeatability of photorefraction. METHODS: This diagnostic study included the right eyes of 86 children aged 7-12 years. Refractive status was measured using photorefraction (PlusoptiX SO(4), GmbH, Nürnberg, Germany) and autorefraction (Topcon RM800, USA) with and without cycloplegia. Photorefraction for each eye was performed three times to assess repeatability. RESULTS: The overall agreement between photorefraction and cycloautorefraction was over 81% for all refractive errors. Photorefractometry had acceptable sensitivity and specificity for myopia and astigmatism. There was no statistically significant difference considering myopia and astigmatism in all comparisons, while the difference was significant for hyperopia using both amblyogenic (P = 0.006) and nonamblyogenic criteria (P = 0.001). A myopic shift of 1.21 diopter (D) and 1.58 D occurred with photorefraction in nonamblyogenic and amblyogenic hyperopia, respectively. Using revised cut-off points of + 1.12 D and + 2.6 D instead of + 2.00 D and + 3.50 D improved the sensitivity of photorefractometry to 84.62% and 69.23%, respectively. The repeatability of photorefraction for measurement of myopia, astigmatism and hyperopia was acceptable (intra-cluster correlation [ICC]: 0.98, 0.94 and 0.77, respectively). Autorefraction results were significantly different from cycloautorefraction in hyperopia (P < 0.0001), but comparable in myopia and astigmatism. Also, noncycloglegic autorefraction results were similar to photorefraction in this study. CONCLUSION: Although photorefraction was accurate for measurement of myopia and astigmatism, its sensitivity for hyperopia was low which could be improved by considering revised cut-off points. Considering cut-off points, photorefraction can be used as a screening method.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4687253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46872532016-01-04 Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry Rajavi, Zhale Sabbaghi, Hamideh Baghini, Ahmad Shojaei Yaseri, Mehdi Sheibani, Koroush Norouzi, Ghazal J Ophthalmic Vis Res Original Article PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of photorefraction and autorefraction as compared to cycloautorefraction and to detect the repeatability of photorefraction. METHODS: This diagnostic study included the right eyes of 86 children aged 7-12 years. Refractive status was measured using photorefraction (PlusoptiX SO(4), GmbH, Nürnberg, Germany) and autorefraction (Topcon RM800, USA) with and without cycloplegia. Photorefraction for each eye was performed three times to assess repeatability. RESULTS: The overall agreement between photorefraction and cycloautorefraction was over 81% for all refractive errors. Photorefractometry had acceptable sensitivity and specificity for myopia and astigmatism. There was no statistically significant difference considering myopia and astigmatism in all comparisons, while the difference was significant for hyperopia using both amblyogenic (P = 0.006) and nonamblyogenic criteria (P = 0.001). A myopic shift of 1.21 diopter (D) and 1.58 D occurred with photorefraction in nonamblyogenic and amblyogenic hyperopia, respectively. Using revised cut-off points of + 1.12 D and + 2.6 D instead of + 2.00 D and + 3.50 D improved the sensitivity of photorefractometry to 84.62% and 69.23%, respectively. The repeatability of photorefraction for measurement of myopia, astigmatism and hyperopia was acceptable (intra-cluster correlation [ICC]: 0.98, 0.94 and 0.77, respectively). Autorefraction results were significantly different from cycloautorefraction in hyperopia (P < 0.0001), but comparable in myopia and astigmatism. Also, noncycloglegic autorefraction results were similar to photorefraction in this study. CONCLUSION: Although photorefraction was accurate for measurement of myopia and astigmatism, its sensitivity for hyperopia was low which could be improved by considering revised cut-off points. Considering cut-off points, photorefraction can be used as a screening method. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4687253/ /pubmed/26730305 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.170360 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Rajavi, Zhale
Sabbaghi, Hamideh
Baghini, Ahmad Shojaei
Yaseri, Mehdi
Sheibani, Koroush
Norouzi, Ghazal
Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title_full Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title_fullStr Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title_short Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Measurements by Photorefractometry
title_sort accuracy and repeatability of refractive error measurements by photorefractometry
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26730305
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.170360
work_keys_str_mv AT rajavizhale accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry
AT sabbaghihamideh accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry
AT baghiniahmadshojaei accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry
AT yaserimehdi accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry
AT sheibanikoroush accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry
AT norouzighazal accuracyandrepeatabilityofrefractiveerrormeasurementsbyphotorefractometry