Repeatability of Aberrometry-Based Automated Subjective Refraction in Healthy and Keratoconus Subjects



Downloads per month over past year

Carracedo Rodríguez, Juan Gonzalo and Carpena Torres, Carlos and Pastrana, Cristina and Privado Aroco, Ana and Serramito Blanco, María and Batres Valderas, Laura (2020) Repeatability of Aberrometry-Based Automated Subjective Refraction in Healthy and Keratoconus Subjects. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2020 . 7 p.. ISSN 2090-004X

[thumbnail of Carracedo_2021_Hindawi_4831298.pdf] PDF
Creative Commons Attribution.


Official URL:


Purpose. To compare the intersession repeatability of the Eye Refract, a new instrument to perform aberrometry-based automated subjective refraction, on healthy and keratoconus subjects. Materials and Methods. A cross-sectional and randomized study was performed. A total of 64 participants were evaluated in the study, selecting one eye per participant randomly. The sample was divided into two different groups: 33 healthy subjects (38.85 ± 13.21 years) and 31 with keratoconus (37.29 ± 11.37 years). Three refractions per participant with the Eye Refract were performed on three different days, without cycloplegia. The repeatability analysis of refractive variables (M, J0, and J45), binocular corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), and spent time in refraction was performed in terms of repeatability (Sr), its 95% confidence interval (r), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results. There were no statistically significant differences (P ≥ 0.05) between sessions in both groups for all refractive variables (M, J0, and J45) and BCDVA. Spent time in refraction was reduced as the sessions went by (P < 0.05). The Eye Refract was more repeatable for refractive errors assessment in healthy subjects (M: Sr = 0.27 D; J0: Sr = 0.09 D; J45: Sr = 0.06 D) compared to those with keratoconus (M: Sr = 0.65 D; J0: Sr = 0.29 D; J45: Sr = 0.24 D), while it was similar for BCDVA. Conclusions. The Eye Refract offered better repeatability to assess refractive errors in healthy subjects compared to those with keratoconus. Despite measurements being also consistent in keratoconus subjects, they should be treated with caution in clinical practice.

Item Type:Article
Additional Information:

Received 7 July 2020; Revised 13 October 2020; Accepted 19 October 2020; Published 30 October 2020

Uncontrolled Keywords:Refraction; Aberrometry; Keratoconus; Subjetive refraction; Eye refract
Subjects:Medical sciences > Medicine > Ophtalmology
Medical sciences > Optics > Optometry
ID Code:63992
Deposited On:03 Mar 2021 13:24
Last Modified:04 Mar 2021 08:24

Origin of downloads

Repository Staff Only: item control page