Cargando…
Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR)
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) to traditional refractive methods. METHODS: Fifty healthy adult subjects were examined by autorefractor, followed by subjective phoropter refinement. Subjects were then evaluated using the VAS...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6750206/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31571819 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S213294 |
_version_ | 1783452422618742784 |
---|---|
author | Kabat, Alan G Lievens, Christopher W Newman, Christina M Weber, Jacob |
author_facet | Kabat, Alan G Lievens, Christopher W Newman, Christina M Weber, Jacob |
author_sort | Kabat, Alan G |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) to traditional refractive methods. METHODS: Fifty healthy adult subjects were examined by autorefractor, followed by subjective phoropter refinement. Subjects were then evaluated using the VASR (Vmax Vision) to obtain an objective and subjective result. Three total assessments were performed for each subject using each of the methods described. Corrected visual acuity was recorded for each eye after each procedure. The total time was measured for both the traditional and VASR refraction. RESULTS: A comparison of the results obtained by traditional refraction and VASR revealed no statistically significant difference from the mean in equivalent sphere measurements (P=0.1383), and the datasets were highly correlated (r=0.993). The data comparisons for cylinder power and axis were similar (cylinder: P=0.6377, r=0.864) (axis: P=0.6991, r=0.738). VASR, on average, required 71 additional seconds to complete when compared to traditional phoropter refraction. In terms of repeatability, the average difference noted upon repeat of equivalent sphere power was 0.01 D for the phoropter (P=0.98) and 0.10 D for the VASR (P=0.23). For sphere power, the average difference was 0.02 D for the phoropter (P=0.55) and 0.07 D for the VASR (P=0.58). For cylinder power, the average difference was 0.02 D for the phoropter (P=0.11) and 0.03 D for the VASR (P=0.39). For all refractive methods, the differences between measurements amounted to ≤0.10 diopters, which is neither clinically nor statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Refractive error results obtained with the VASR were not statistically different from those achieved using traditional phoropter methods. Time elapsed for the VASR was slightly longer than a more traditional refractive sequence. The VASR demonstrated clinically and statistically significant repeatability of measurement, consistent with traditional refraction. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6750206 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67502062019-09-30 Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) Kabat, Alan G Lievens, Christopher W Newman, Christina M Weber, Jacob Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) to traditional refractive methods. METHODS: Fifty healthy adult subjects were examined by autorefractor, followed by subjective phoropter refinement. Subjects were then evaluated using the VASR (Vmax Vision) to obtain an objective and subjective result. Three total assessments were performed for each subject using each of the methods described. Corrected visual acuity was recorded for each eye after each procedure. The total time was measured for both the traditional and VASR refraction. RESULTS: A comparison of the results obtained by traditional refraction and VASR revealed no statistically significant difference from the mean in equivalent sphere measurements (P=0.1383), and the datasets were highly correlated (r=0.993). The data comparisons for cylinder power and axis were similar (cylinder: P=0.6377, r=0.864) (axis: P=0.6991, r=0.738). VASR, on average, required 71 additional seconds to complete when compared to traditional phoropter refraction. In terms of repeatability, the average difference noted upon repeat of equivalent sphere power was 0.01 D for the phoropter (P=0.98) and 0.10 D for the VASR (P=0.23). For sphere power, the average difference was 0.02 D for the phoropter (P=0.55) and 0.07 D for the VASR (P=0.58). For cylinder power, the average difference was 0.02 D for the phoropter (P=0.11) and 0.03 D for the VASR (P=0.39). For all refractive methods, the differences between measurements amounted to ≤0.10 diopters, which is neither clinically nor statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Refractive error results obtained with the VASR were not statistically different from those achieved using traditional phoropter methods. Time elapsed for the VASR was slightly longer than a more traditional refractive sequence. The VASR demonstrated clinically and statistically significant repeatability of measurement, consistent with traditional refraction. Dove 2019-09-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6750206/ /pubmed/31571819 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S213294 Text en © 2019 Kabat et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Kabat, Alan G Lievens, Christopher W Newman, Christina M Weber, Jacob Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title | Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title_full | Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title_fullStr | Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title_short | Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR) |
title_sort | accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (vasr) |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6750206/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31571819 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S213294 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kabatalang accuracyspeedandrepeatabilityofthevoiceassistedsubjectiverefractorvasr AT lievenschristopherw accuracyspeedandrepeatabilityofthevoiceassistedsubjectiverefractorvasr AT newmanchristinam accuracyspeedandrepeatabilityofthevoiceassistedsubjectiverefractorvasr AT weberjacob accuracyspeedandrepeatabilityofthevoiceassistedsubjectiverefractorvasr |