Author:
Shahid Sharmeen,Maimoona Rehmat ,Amna Mahmood ,Farooq Erum,Shanza Dastgir
Abstract
Refractive errors are a noteworthy cause of visual disruption worldwide. Objective: To compare the results of dynamic and cycloplegic retinoscopy in children. Methods: A descriptive-type cross-sectional study was conducted at the university of Lahore teaching hospital on 50 patients from 5 to 12 years of age. Approval was taken from the ethical board of the institution and informed consent from patient’s parents. Patients who had any other ocular pathology other than refractive errors were excluded. To study the refraction results in children, first in a dark room, retinoscopy without cycloplegic was performed then 1% cyclopentolate eye drops were used. After that retinoscopy was done under cycloplegic effect results were compared after being converted into spherical equivalent. Paired sample t-test was applied to compare means. P < .05 was taken as significant. Results: There were 25 males and 25 females. The mean age in years was 7.66 ±there were 12 myopic patients, 22 hypermetropic and 16 astigmatic patients. The mean logMar of visual acuity uncorrected was 0.5 ± 0.23 and the best corrected visual acuity was 0.1± 0.01. The mean S.E of right eye dynamic retinoscopy was 1.78±2.60, cycloplegic retinoscopy 1.52± 2.54 and of left eye was 1.72±49 and1.47± 2.34 respectively. It can be deduced that on average 0.26D more by dynamic retinoscopy. A significant correlation with r 0.96 and r 0.94 in left eye existed. Conclusion: There is a significant difference between cycloplegic retinoscopy and near retinoscopy. It was deduced that near retinoscopy showed more hypermetropic readings than cycloplegic retinoscopy
Publisher
CrossLinks International Publishers
Reference20 articles.
1. 1. Kaur K and Gurnani B. Cycloplegic And Noncycloplegic Refraction. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing. 2022 Dec
2. 2. Gomez-Salazar F, Campos-Romero A, Gomez-Campaña H, Cruz-Zamudio C, Chaidez-Felix M, Leon-Sicairos N, et al. Refractive errors among children, adolescents and adults attending eye clinics in Mexico. International journal of ophthalmology. 2017; 10(5): 796-802.
3. 3. Williams KM, Verhoeven VJ, Cumberland P, Bertelsen G, Wolfram C, Buitendijk GH, et al. Prevalence of refractive error in Europe: the European eye epidemiology (E3) Consortium. European journal of epidemiology. 2015 Apr; 30(4): 305-15. doi: 10.1007/s10654-015-0010-0
4. 4. Baird PN, Saw SM, Lanca C, Guggenheim JA, Smith III EL, Zhou X, et al. Myopia. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2020 Dec; 6(1): 1-20. doi: 10.1038/s41572-020-00231-4
5. 5. Ruiz HM, Fernández-Agrafojo D, Cardona G. Correlation and agreement between the Mohindra and cycloplegic retinoscopy techniques in children. Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología. 2022 Jan; 97(1): 9-16. doi: 10.1016/j.oftale.2021.01.011