Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes

James S. Wolffsohn, Leon N. Davies, Shehzad A. Naroo, Phillip J. Buckhurst, George A. Gibson, Navneet Gupta, Jennifer Patricia Craig, Sunil Shah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)498-501
Number of pages4
JournalBritish Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume95
Issue number4
Early online date23 Jul 2010
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2011

Fingerprint

Intraocular Lenses
Prescriptions

Bibliographical note

This article has been accepted for publication in British Journal of Ophthalmology. The definitive copyedited, typeset version Wolffsohn, JS, Davies, LN, Naroo, SA, Buckhurst, PJ, Gibson, GA, Gupta, N, Craig, JP & Shah, S 2011, 'Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes', British journal of ophthalmology, vol 95, no. 4, pp. 498-501 is available online at: http://bjo.bmj.com/content/95/4/498

Keywords

  • ocular accommodation
  • aged
  • female
  • humans
  • intraocular lenses
  • male
  • optical devices
  • pseudophakia
  • ocular refraction
  • refractive errors
  • reproducibility of results
  • vision screening
  • visual acuity

Cite this

@article{8538ce804355420199859d0083c4ac1d,
title = "Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes",
abstract = "Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71{\%} within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was",
keywords = "ocular accommodation, aged, female, humans, intraocular lenses, male, optical devices, pseudophakia, ocular refraction, refractive errors, reproducibility of results, vision screening, visual acuity",
author = "Wolffsohn, {James S.} and Davies, {Leon N.} and Naroo, {Shehzad A.} and Buckhurst, {Phillip J.} and Gibson, {George A.} and Navneet Gupta and Craig, {Jennifer Patricia} and Sunil Shah",
note = "This article has been accepted for publication in British Journal of Ophthalmology. The definitive copyedited, typeset version Wolffsohn, JS, Davies, LN, Naroo, SA, Buckhurst, PJ, Gibson, GA, Gupta, N, Craig, JP & Shah, S 2011, 'Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes', British journal of ophthalmology, vol 95, no. 4, pp. 498-501 is available online at: http://bjo.bmj.com/content/95/4/498",
year = "2011",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1136/bjo.2010.185009",
language = "English",
volume = "95",
pages = "498--501",
journal = "British Journal of Ophthalmology",
issn = "0007-1161",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes. / Wolffsohn, James S.; Davies, Leon N.; Naroo, Shehzad A.; Buckhurst, Phillip J.; Gibson, George A.; Gupta, Navneet; Craig, Jennifer Patricia; Shah, Sunil.

In: British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 95, No. 4, 04.2011, p. 498-501.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes

AU - Wolffsohn, James S.

AU - Davies, Leon N.

AU - Naroo, Shehzad A.

AU - Buckhurst, Phillip J.

AU - Gibson, George A.

AU - Gupta, Navneet

AU - Craig, Jennifer Patricia

AU - Shah, Sunil

N1 - This article has been accepted for publication in British Journal of Ophthalmology. The definitive copyedited, typeset version Wolffsohn, JS, Davies, LN, Naroo, SA, Buckhurst, PJ, Gibson, GA, Gupta, N, Craig, JP & Shah, S 2011, 'Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes', British journal of ophthalmology, vol 95, no. 4, pp. 498-501 is available online at: http://bjo.bmj.com/content/95/4/498

PY - 2011/4

Y1 - 2011/4

N2 - Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was

AB - Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was

KW - ocular accommodation

KW - aged

KW - female

KW - humans

KW - intraocular lenses

KW - male

KW - optical devices

KW - pseudophakia

KW - ocular refraction

KW - refractive errors

KW - reproducibility of results

KW - vision screening

KW - visual acuity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952933240&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bjo.2010.185009

DO - 10.1136/bjo.2010.185009

M3 - Article

VL - 95

SP - 498

EP - 501

JO - British Journal of Ophthalmology

JF - British Journal of Ophthalmology

SN - 0007-1161

IS - 4

ER -