Cargando…

Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement

PURPOSE: To evaluate the precision of objective refraction measurements with six different autorefractors that have different designs and measurement principles and to compare the objective refraction values with the subjective refraction. METHOD: Objective refraction of 55 participants was measured...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya, Brautaset, Rune, Domínguez-Vicent, Alberto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704684/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441778
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278269
_version_ 1784840107235213312
author Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya
Brautaset, Rune
Domínguez-Vicent, Alberto
author_facet Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya
Brautaset, Rune
Domínguez-Vicent, Alberto
author_sort Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the precision of objective refraction measurements with six different autorefractors that have different designs and measurement principles and to compare the objective refraction values with the subjective refraction. METHOD: Objective refraction of 55 participants was measured using six autorefractors with different designs. The instrument features mainly varied in terms of measurement principles, inbuilt fogging, open or closed view, and handheld or stationary designs. Two repeated measurements of objective refraction were performed with each autorefractor. The objective refractions from the six autorefractors were compared with the standard subjective refraction. The repeatability limit and Bland-Altman were used to describe the precision and accuracy of each autorefractor, respectively. The analysis was done using the spherical component of the refraction and the power-vector components, spherical equivalent (M), and cylindrical vectors. RESULTS: The repeatability of all autorefractors was within 1.00 and 0.35D for measuring the M and both cylindrical components, respectively. Inbuilt fogging was the common feature of the instruments that showed better repeatability. Compared to subjective refraction, the mean difference for sphere and M was below +0.50D, and it was close to zero for the cylindrical components. The instruments that had inbuilt fogging showed narrower limit of agreement. When combined with fogging, the open field refractors showed better precision and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The inbuilt fogging is the most important feature followed by the open view in determining the precision and accuracy of the autorefractor values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9704684
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97046842022-11-29 Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya Brautaset, Rune Domínguez-Vicent, Alberto PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: To evaluate the precision of objective refraction measurements with six different autorefractors that have different designs and measurement principles and to compare the objective refraction values with the subjective refraction. METHOD: Objective refraction of 55 participants was measured using six autorefractors with different designs. The instrument features mainly varied in terms of measurement principles, inbuilt fogging, open or closed view, and handheld or stationary designs. Two repeated measurements of objective refraction were performed with each autorefractor. The objective refractions from the six autorefractors were compared with the standard subjective refraction. The repeatability limit and Bland-Altman were used to describe the precision and accuracy of each autorefractor, respectively. The analysis was done using the spherical component of the refraction and the power-vector components, spherical equivalent (M), and cylindrical vectors. RESULTS: The repeatability of all autorefractors was within 1.00 and 0.35D for measuring the M and both cylindrical components, respectively. Inbuilt fogging was the common feature of the instruments that showed better repeatability. Compared to subjective refraction, the mean difference for sphere and M was below +0.50D, and it was close to zero for the cylindrical components. The instruments that had inbuilt fogging showed narrower limit of agreement. When combined with fogging, the open field refractors showed better precision and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The inbuilt fogging is the most important feature followed by the open view in determining the precision and accuracy of the autorefractor values. Public Library of Science 2022-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9704684/ /pubmed/36441778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278269 Text en © 2022 Venkataraman et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Venkataraman, Abinaya Priya
Brautaset, Rune
Domínguez-Vicent, Alberto
Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title_full Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title_fullStr Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title_full_unstemmed Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title_short Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
title_sort effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704684/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441778
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278269
work_keys_str_mv AT venkataramanabinayapriya effectofsixdifferentautorefractordesignsontheprecisionandaccuracyofrefractiveerrormeasurement
AT brautasetrune effectofsixdifferentautorefractordesignsontheprecisionandaccuracyofrefractiveerrormeasurement
AT dominguezvicentalberto effectofsixdifferentautorefractordesignsontheprecisionandaccuracyofrefractiveerrormeasurement