Ametropia detection using a novel, compact wavefront autorefractor

Author:

Hernández Carlos S.123,Gil Andrea123,Zaytouny Amal24,Casares Ignacio13,Poderoso Jesús13,de Lara Alfonso13,Wehse Alec2,Dave Shivang R.2,Lim Daryl2,Lage Eduardo123ORCID,Alejandre‐Alba Nicolas35

Affiliation:

1. Department of Electronics and Communications Technology Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Madrid Spain

2. PlenOptika, Inc. Boston Massachusetts USA

3. Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de la Fundación Jiménez Diaz Madrid Spain

4. Instituto de Óptica “Daza de Valdes” Spanish National Research Council, CSIC Madrid Spain

5. Ophthalmology Department Fundación Jiménez Diaz Hospital Madrid Spain

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionDespite the well‐known reproducibility issues of subjective refraction, most studies evaluating autorefractors compared differences between the device and subjective refraction. This work evaluated the performance of a novel handheld Hartmann–Shack‐based autorefractor using an alternative protocol, which considered the inherent variability of subjective refraction.MethodsParticipants underwent an initial measurement with a desktop autorefractor, two subjective refractions (SR1 and SR2) and a final measurement with the QuickSee Free (QSFree) portable autorefractor. Autorefractor performance was evaluated by comparing the differences between the QSFree and each of the subjective refractions with the difference between the subjective refractions (SR1 vs. SR2) using Bland–Altman analysis and percentage of agreement.ResultsA total of 75 subjects (53 ± 14 years) were enrolled in the study. The average difference in the absolute spherical equivalent (M) between the QSFree and the SR1 and SR2 was ±0.24 and ±0.02 D, respectively, that is, very similar or smaller than the SR1 versus SR2 difference (±0.26 D). Average differences in astigmatic components were found to be negligible. The results demonstrate that differences between QSFree and both subjective refractions in J0 and J45 were within ±0.50 D for at least 96% of the measurements. The limits of agreement (LOAs) of the differences between QSFree and SR1, as well as QSFree and SR2, were higher than those observed between SR1 and SR2 for M, J0 and J45.ConclusionsA protocol was designed and validated for the evaluation of a refractive device to account for the variability of subjective refraction. This protocol was used to evaluate a novel portable autorefractor and observed a smaller difference between the device and subjective refractions than the difference between the two subjective refraction measurements in terms of mean bias error, although the standard deviation was higher.

Funder

Comunidad de Madrid

Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad

National Eye Institute

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Sensory Systems,Optometry,Ophthalmology

Reference33 articles.

1. Keeping an eye on eye care: monitoring progress towards effective coverage

2. WHO Organization.World report on vision.2019.https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241516570. Accessed 11 Dec 2023.

3. The International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness.Vision Atlas.https://www.iapb.org/learn/vision‐atlas/. Accessed 11 Dec 2023.

4. The burden of uncorrected refractive error

5. Accuracy of a Smartphone-based Autorefractor Compared with Criterion-standard Refraction

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3