Universidad Complutense de Madrid
E-Prints Complutense

Comparison of Two Wavefront Autorefractors: Binocular Open-Field versus Monocular Closed-Field

Impacto

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Carracedo Rodríguez, Juan Gonzalo and Carpena Torres, Carlos and Batres Valderas, Laura and Serramito Blanco, María and González Bergaz, Anahí (2020) Comparison of Two Wavefront Autorefractors: Binocular Open-Field versus Monocular Closed-Field. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2020 . p. 8580471. ISSN 2090-004X

[thumbnail of Carracedo_Hindawi_2020_8580471.pdf] PDF
487kB

Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8580471




Abstract

Purpose. To evaluate the agreement and repeatability between a new commercially available binocular open-field wavefront autorefractor, as part of the Eye Refract system, and a monocular closed-field wavefront autorefractor (VX110). Methods. A cross-sectional, randomized, and single-masked study was performed. Ninety-nine eyes of 99 healthy participants (37.22 ± 18.04 years, range 8 to 69 years) were randomly analyzed. Three measurements with the Eye Refract and the VX110 were taken on three different days, under noncycloplegic conditions. Mean spherical equivalent (MSE), cylindrical vectors (J0 and J45), and binocular corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) were compared between both autorefractors. An intersession repeatability analysis was done considering the values of repeatability (Sr) and its 95% limit (r). Results. The VX110 showed more negative values (P<0.001) in terms of MSE in comparison with the Eye Refract (0.20 D). Regarding cylindrical vectors, J45 showed statistically significant differences (P=0.001) between both wavefront autorefractors, but they were not clinically relevant (<0.05 D). In BCDVA, there were no statistically significant differences (P=0.667) between both wavefront autorefractors. Additionally, the Eye Refract was more repeatable than the VX110 in terms of both MSE (SrEYE REFRACT = 0.21 D, SrVX110 = 0.53 D) and J0 (SrEYE REFRACT = 0.12 D, SrVX110 = 0.35 D). Conclusions. The Eye Refract provided enough accuracy and reliability to estimate refractive errors in different age groups, achieving better results than the VX110. Therefore, the Eye Refract proved to be a useful autorefractor to be incorporated into clinical practice.


Item Type:Article
Additional Information:

Received: 28 Aug 2019; Revised: 14 Nov 2019; Accepted: 17 Dec 2019; Published: 03 Jan 2020

Uncontrolled Keywords:Wavefront autorefractor; Binocular open-field; Monocular closed-field; Visual fields; Autorefractor
Subjects:Medical sciences > Optics > Optometry
Medical sciences > Optics > Geometrical and instumental optics
ID Code:58890
Deposited On:24 Feb 2020 16:01
Last Modified:24 Feb 2020 16:09

Origin of downloads

Repository Staff Only: item control page