|
KMID : 0360220210620050680
|
|
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2021 Volume.62 No. 5 p.680 ~ p.687
|
|
|
Usefulness of Refractive Measurement by Wavefront Aberrometer in Children
|
|
Oh Si-Eun
Whang Woong-Joo
Park Mi-Ra
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: To compare the refractive measurements from a wavefront aberrometer, autorefractor, and retinoscopy after cycloplegia in evaluating the usefulness and validity of refractive measurements by a wavefront aberrometer in children.
Methods: A total of 130 eyes of 65 children, aged from 3 to 16 years, were examined using retinoscopy, a wavefront aberrometer (OPD-Scan III), and an autorefractor (KR-1) after cycloplegia. Refractive measurements were converted to power vectors (M, J0, and J45) and cylindrical absolute values for statistical analysis. The agreement between instruments was assessed and the correlations of measurements were evaluated. Subgroup analysis was performed on two subgroups: one representing less refractive error (|M| < 2 D on cycloplegic retinoscopy) and the other with larger refractive error (|M| ≥ 2 D on cycloplegic retinoscopy).
Results: Compared with retinoscopy readings, the aberrometer and autorefractor yielded more myopic values (p = 0.007, p < 0.001).
In the less refractive error group, the autorefractor results showed statistically significant differences from retinoscopy readings for M, J0, and J45 and the cylindrical absolute value (all p < 0.05); there were no statistically significant differences between M, J0, and J45 vectors of the aberrometer and those obtained using retinoscopy (p = 0.674, p = 0.699, p = 0.766). With the larger refractive error group, the M vectors of the aberrometer and autorefractor showed more myopic values than the M vector retinoscopy readings; the differences were statistically significant (all p < 0.001).
Conclusions: The wavefront aberrometer yielded refraction readings closer to those obtained with retinoscopy than the automated refraction in the less refractive error group. With a larger refractive error, statistically significant differences (all p < 0.001) were found among the aberrometer, autorefractor, and retinoscopy readings.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Aberrometry, Refraction, Retinoscopy
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
  
|
|