• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.433-438
• /
• 2011

Purpose: To investigate the proper distance from patient to target when measuring refractive error using open view target type auto-refractor(OVTAR), it was compared refractive errors between by OVTAR using N-vision-K5001 auto-refractor and internal fixation target type auto-refractor(IFTAR) using Canon auto-refractor. Methods: 21 subjects(42 eyes) aged 22.2(${\pm}$3.4) years old who had over 1.0 of corrected visual acuity and no ocular disease were participated for this study. Noncycloplegic measurements of refractive error were performed using a IFTAR(RK-F1, Canon, Japan) and an OVTAR(N-vision-K5001, Shin-nippon, Japan). The distances from subjects to targets in using the open the view target type auto-refractor were 1 m, 3 m, 4 m and 6 m. The refractive errors were compared between by IFTAR and by 1 m, 3 m, 4 m and 6 m target distances respectively using OVTAR. Results: At 1 m fixation distance the mean of refractive errors for total subjects was not significantly different between by OVTAR(-2.75${\pm}$1.84 D) and by IFTAR(-2.95${\pm}$2.04 D)(p=0.06). However at 3, 4 and 6 m fixation distance refractive errors by OVTAR were significantly lower myopic refractive errors than by IFTAR(p<0.05). Conclusions: The distance from subject to fixation target is needed over 3 m for the measurement of refractive error using OVTAR even not to 5~6 m distance.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.55-62
• /
• 2006

Clinical evaluation of the Closed-view autorefractor and Open-view autorefractor was performed to examine validity and repeatability compared with subjective refraction. Measurements of refractive error were performed on 126 eyes of 65 subjects (aged $26{\pm}7.5$ years) subjectively noncycloplegic. Intersession repeatability of the Closed-view and Open-view were also assessed on all 65 subjects together with Intersession repeatability on 7 to 14 days intervals. Spherical powers and spherical equivalent values of subjective refraction and autorefractions by Closed-view and Open-view were analyzed by paired T-test. The mean spherical powers of subjective refraction, Closed-view and Open-view were determined to be $-2.125{\pm}2.155D$, $-2.146{\pm}1.907D$, $-2.117{\pm}2.121D$, respectively. The mean spherical equivalent values of subjective refraction, Closed-view and Open-view were determined to be $-2.362{\pm}2.204D$, $-2.391{\pm}1.967D$, $-2.366{\pm}2.162D$, respectively. The results showed that the refractive errors as measured by the Closed-view and Open-view were found to be similar to the subjective refraction in all components.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.8
• /
• pp.353-359
• /
• 2018

In this study, the performance between subjective refraction and open-field/closed view autorefraction was estimated. We measured the refractive error of early adults aged 18 to 20 years who did not have eye disease. The differences between measurements obtained by subjective refraction and open-field autorefraction for SE, J0, and J45 were $-0.13{\pm}0.53D$ (p=0.17), $+0.33{\pm}0.68D$ (p=0.01), and $+0.13{\pm}0.68D$ (p=0.26), respectively, with only J0 differing significantly. The differences between the measurements of subjective refraction and closed-view autorefraction for SE, J0, and J45 were $-0.30{\pm}0.42D$ (p=0.00), $+0.30{\pm}0.71D$ (p=0.02), and $-0.02{\pm}0.63D$ (p=0.88), respectively, with only SE and J0 differing significantly. The coefficient of accuracy for SE, J0, and J45 components of open-field and closed-view autorefraction were 1.04, 1.33, and 1.34 and 0.83, 1.40, and 1.24, respectively. It is possible to predict the refractive error, which is necessary when deciding on subjective refraction, by measuring the objective refraction of open-field/closed view autorefractors.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.63-69
• /
• 2006

Clinical evaluation by Astigmatic Components of autorefractors was performed to examine validity and accuracy compared with subjective refraction. The mean cylindrical powers of Astigmatic Components of Subjective Refraction, Closed-view and Open-view were found to be $-0.689{\pm}0.516D$, $-0.691{\pm}0.530D$, $-0.470{\pm}0.507D$, respectively. The Difference of cylindrical Components between Subjective Refraction and Closed, Open-view were found to be $0.002{\pm}0.191D$, $0.015{\pm}0.137D$, respectively. Approximately 85% of Closed-view and Open-view autorefractor measurements were within ${\pm}20^{\circ}$ range of the difference of cylindrical axis with subjective refraction. The mean $J_0$ Components of Astigmatic Components of subjective refraction, Closed-view and Open-view were found to be $-0.155{\pm}0.332D$, $-0.004{\pm}0.178D$, $-0.001{\pm}0.156D$, respectively. The mean $J_{45}$ Components of Astigmatic Components, Closed-view and Open-view were found to be $-0.023{\pm}0.227D$, $-0.026{\pm}0.172D$, $-0.014{\pm}0.182D$, respectively. Both of the Closed-view and Open-view refractor showed available accuracy in measuring astigmatic components.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.403-410
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purposes of this study are to investigate accommodative response among emmetropes, spectacle wearer and contact lens wearer, and correlation between refractive error and accommodative respons for each group. Methods: The 72 subjects(144 eyes) who do not have any ocular diseases were participate in this study. Subjects were categorized into emmetropes, spectacle wearer and contact lens wearer by refractive error using closed-field auto-refractometer. We measured dominant eye, naked/habitual visual acuity and refractive error of monocular/binocular vision of refractive error for far/near distance with open-field auto-refractometer and calculated accommodative lag. Results: There were no significant difference of accommodative lag between right and left eye dominant and non-dominant eye, monocular and binocular vision, and spectacle lens wearer and contact lens wearer, However the accommodative lag of binocular vision was severe than monocular vision at near. The lag of myopia was larger than emmetropes, and male was larger than female. Significant correlation was found between refractive error and accommodative lag in total subjects and the same result was found in emmetropes and contact lens wearer. However there were no significant correlation in the spectacle wearer. Conclusions: There were significant difference between emmetrops and myopes in terms of accommodative lag, however accommodative lag of spectacle wearer was not different with contact lens wearer in myopes. There were also significant correlation between refractive error and accommodative lag in emmetropes and contact lens wearer, but the accommodative lag of spectacle wearer was not significantly correlated with refractive error.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.187-193
• /
• 2015

Purpose: This study was aimed to investigate effects of increased breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) which is the standard measurement of alcohol consumption in sobriety test under current laws on visual acuity and values of objective refraction. Methods: For twenty three males in 20s (average age $21.17{\pm}2.19$ years, body mass index (BMI) $22.09{\pm}2.16$) were selected. Distance and near visual test was performed at BrAC of 0%, 0.05% and 0.08%, and objective refraction with open-field auto-refractometer was also performed at different BrAC. Results: As breath alcohol concentration is increased, distance visual acuity was decreased, which was statistically significant, but near visual acuity was not changed. Also, values of objective refraction tended to be increased towards minus as breath alcohol concentration is increased. Conclusions: As breath alcohol concentration is increased, corrected visual acuity is decreased and refractive power is towards minus, it is necessary that visual acuity test and refraction measurement should be conducted under sober condition.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.323-328
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this research was to measurement real Accommodative response amount using both eyes open-view autorefractometer. Compared each Accommodative response amount to distinction of sex, age, kind of ametropia, amount of astigmatism and kind of astigmatism. The subjects were 153 healthy men and women between the age of 20~80 years. Age comparison, 20 years 1.15D, 30 years 1.23D and above 40 years 0.60D. It was no difference between 20 to 30 years old. But, is decrescent remarkably above 40 years old. Ametropia examined by hypermetropia 1.78D, emmetropia 1.51D, low myopia 1.08D, middle myopia 0.72D, high myopia 0.643D. Myopia increased, Accommodative response amount was expose that decrease. Astigmatism examined by non astigmatism 1.13D, low astigmatism 1.12D, middle astigmatism 0.85D, high astigmatism 0.83D. Astigmatism increased, Accommodative response amount was expose that decrease. The sex and astigmatism type difference appeared with the fact that the result is not a difference.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.121-125
• /
• 2009

Purpose: This study has been conducted to know the prevalence of anisometropia and corneal refraction, accommodative response of myopic anisometropia. Methods: The study subject were 67 persons who myopic anisometropia of at least 1.00D, from among 808 total subject without ophthalmic diseases history from age 5 to 89 and the test were used to examine with both eyes open-view autorefractometer (NvisionK-5001). Results: The case which anisometropia were 85(10.5%) persons and myopic anisometropia were 67(78.8%) persons among the anisometropia. Difference between higher myopic eye and lower myopic eye were -1.22D${\pm}$0.94 in spherical equivalent, -0.25D${\pm}$0.72 in accommodative response, 0.04D${\pm}$0.68 in corneal refraction. In addition, the same case of both eyes accommodative response were 33(49.3%) persons, the great case of lower myopic eye accommodative response were 25(37.3%) persons and the great case of higher myopic eye accommodative response were 9(13.4%) persons. Conclusions: Myopic anisometropia was not affected by corneal refraction and both eyes difference of spherical equivalent was less as compared with both eyes difference of accommodative response.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.79-85
• /
• 2014

Purpose: This study investigated accommodative changes by measuring accommodative response, appearing on the normal and convergence insufficiency Group, by using both eyes open-view auto-refractometer (Nvision-K5001, shin-nippon, Japan). Methods: It carried out objective and subjective refractions, targeting 74 college students (54 males and 20 females) aged between 19 and 29 ($21.59{\pm}2.53$), spherical equivalent OD $-2.28{\pm}2.03$ D, OS $-2.18{\pm}2.01$ D, by measuring accommodative responses at full correction and under correction with plus lens +0.25, +0.50, +0.75 arbitrarily added. Results: In the group of normal and convergence insufficiency, the shorter fixation distances were, the greater accommodative lags showed. The group of convergence insufficiency showed the lesser changes of accommodative response than those of normal. But we found that the convergence insufficiency group had a little larger accommodative amplitude in the total fixation distances. The full correction of convergence insufficiency group and the under correction (+0.50 D) of normal were alike in the accommodative responses. We have also investigated that the correlation between accommodative responses and fixation distances was decreased steeply at the excessive low vision correction. Conclusions: Under correction (+0.50 D) in a near distance is expected to avoid unnecessary accommodative responses, make eyes relaxed and comfortable.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.75-81
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The study tried to figure out accommodative changes by measuring accommodative response, appearing on the full vision correction and low vision correction, with both eyes open-view auto-refractometer (Nvision-K5001, Shin-nippon, Japan). Methods: It carried out objective and subjective refractions, targeting 79 college students (58 males and 21 females) aged between 20 and 30($21.14{\pm}2.00$), by measuring accommodative changes with fixation distance at 1.0 m for eyesight of 1.0 after full version correction. The distances of 5.0 m, 1.0 m, 0.50 m, 0.33 m and 0.25 m for eyesight of 0.8, 0.7 and 0.6 after low vision correction arbitrarily added plus lens were applied. Results: the shorter measure fixation distances were, the greater changes accommodative response showed a tendency in the state of both full vision correction and low vision correction(0.7). The state of full vision correction showed a greater change of accommodative response than that of low vision correction(0.7). Both right and left eyes showed low accommodative responses in the state of low vision correction(0.7) than that of full vision correction. As a result of analyzing accommodative response at an eyesight of 0.8, 0.7, and 0.6 after low vision correction, the poorer eyesight was the lower accommodative response. Conclusions: Low vision correction from a near distance is expected to avoid unnecessary accommodative response, make eyes relaxed and prevent accommodative function disorder.