• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.123-130
• /
• 2010

Purpose: The study was conducted to compare the values of auto-refraction, manifest refraction and cycloplegic refraction in school-aged children. Methods: One hundred five myopic school children ranged from 6 to 14 years old (210 eyes, $10.28{\pm}1.59$ years old) were recruited and noncycloplegic auto-refraction (AR) and manifest refraction (MR) were conducted and then underwent cycloplegia and refractive status (CR) again with the auto-refractometer. Results: Refractive powers measured by AR, MR, and CR were highly correlated. However, spherical and cylindrical powers of the subjects measured by AR were measured higher negative power than in CR (p<0.001). From 210 eyes, the discrepancy rate in the spherical and cylindrical powers were 40 eyes (19%) and 19 eyes (9%) of the total subjects, respectively and the differences between noncycloplegic and cycloplegic refractions were higher with the spherical and cylindrical powers increasing. Conclusions: The use of the autorefractometer in children with negative spherical power without cycloplegia may overestimate the actual myopia that subjective refraction is the most important in prescription for the eyeglasses and regression equations would be used to prognose the cycloplegic refraction from the auto-refraction as the basic data for the subjective refraction.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.293-298
• /
• 2012

Purpose: We compared static retinoscopy in eyes opened with cycloplegic refraction depending on the hyperopia for school-aged children. Methods: There were 59 eyes (30 patients) who were divided into 3 groups - the mild hyperopia (+0.25 D ~ +1.00 D), moderate hyperopia (+1.25 D ~ +2.00 D) and high hyperopia (+2.25 D or more). They all had 0.8 visual acuity or more. Autorefraction and retinoscopy were performed prior to cycloplegic refraction, and then copmared with manifest refraction and cycloplegic refraction. Results: Hyperopia measured with static retinoscopy tends to be measured higher than manifest refraction for school-aged children. Changes of spherical power was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Changes of astigmatism was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The difference between cycloplegic refraction and static retinoscopy was not significant for hyperopic school-aged children. The use of retinoscopy was limited for opticians because of legal constraints. The usage of static retinoscopy in eyes opened for optician should be generalized under the conditions not using the cycloplegic.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.99-104
• /
• 2010

Purpose: Difference of refraction result from the method of autorefraction and iTrace were investigaged for the children of elementary school in Asan City. In iTrace method. exclusion of accommodation without cycloplegia was used. Methods: Manifest refractive stale of 42 eyes of 12~13 years old were measured using autorefractor and iTrace. Refractions of far (more than 5 m) and ncar (30 cm) vision were measured using iTrace. All data showed that the spherical equivalent were classified as being in the group 1 (-0.50D < ~ < +1.00D) and 2 (below -0.50D) according 10 refractive errors. Results: Mean spherical equivalent using autorefractor and iTrace (far and near vision) were -1.08D, -0.29D and -2.34D, respectively (p<0.01). Compared with the far vision using iTrace, autorefraction was measured the myopia with -0.50D ~ -1.00D in 52.4% of total eyes. Autorefraction also statistical significant were measured a more myopia than the far vision using iTrace in group I and 2. Conclusions: The difference of refractive errors between autorefraction and iTrace, objective refraction were measured with far vision of more than 5 m were -0.79D. Autoreftaction showed statistically decreased refraction errors than iTrace with far vision.

• 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 Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.219-225
• /
• 2010

Purpose: Usefulness in predicting the power of spherical rigid gas-pearmeable (RGP) lenses prescription using dioptric power matrices and arithmetic calculations was evaluated in this study. Noncycloplegic refractive errors and over-refractions were performed on 110 eyes of 55 subjects (36 males and 19 females, aged $24.60{\pm}1.55$years) in twenties objectively with an auto-refractometer (with keratometer) and subjectively. Tear lenses were calculated from keratometric readings and base curves of RGP lenses, and the power of RGP lenses were computed by a dioptric power matrix and an arithmetic calculation from the manifest refraction and the tear lens, and were compared with those by over-refractions in terms of spherical (Sph), spherical quivalent (SE) and astigmatic power. Results: The mean difference (MD) and 95% limits of agreement (LOA=$MD{\pm}1.96SD$) were better for SE (0.26D, $0.26{\pm}0.70D$) than for Sph (0.61D, $0.61{\pm}0.86D$). The mean difference and agreement of the cylindrical power between matrix and arithmetic calculation (-0.13D, $-0.13{\pm}0.53D$) were better than between the others (-0.24D, $0.24{\pm}0.84D$ between matrix and over-refraction; -0.12D, $0.12{\pm}1.00D$ between arithmetic calculation and over-refraction). The fitness of spherical RGP lenses were 54.5% for matrix, 66.4% for arithmetic calculation and 91.8% for over-refraction. Arithmetic calculation was close to the over-refraction. Conclusions: In predicting indications and powers of spherical RGP lens fitting, although there are the differences of axis between total (spectacle) astigmatism and corneal astigmatism, Spherical equivalent using an arithmetic calculation provides a more useful application than using a dioptric power matrix.