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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kabat, Alan G, Lievens, Christopher W, Newman, Christina M, Weber, Jacob
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