• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.501-509
• /
• 2015

Purpose: To evaluate the reliability of refractive power by comparing the marked refractive power in an automatic phoropter and actually measured spherical/cylindrical refractive power. Methods: Actual refractive power of minus spherical lens and cylindrical lens in an automatic phoropter was measured by a manual lensmeter and compared with the accuracy of marked refractive power. Furthermore, combined refractive power and spherical equivalent refractive power of two overlapped lenses were compared and evaluated with the refractive power of trial lens. Results: An error of 0.125 D and more against the marked degree was observed in 70.6% of spherical refractive power of spherical lens which is built in phoropter, and the higher error was shown with increasing refractive power. Single cylindrical refractive power of cylindrical lens is almost equivalent to the marked degree. Combined spherical refractive power was equivalent to spherical refractive power of single lens when spherical lens and cylindrical lens were overlapped in a phoropter. Thus, there was no change in spherical refractive power by lens overlapping. However, there was a great difference, which suggest the effect induced by overlapping between cylindrical refractive power and the marked degree when spherical lens and cylindrical lens were overlapped. Spherical equivalent refractive power measured by using a phoropter was lower than that estimated by trial glasses frame and marked degree. The difference was bigger with higher refractive power. Conclusions: When assessment of visual acuity is made by using an automatic phoropter for high myopes or myopic astigmatism, some difference against the marked degree may be produced and they may be overcorrected which suggests that improvement is required.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.231-237
• /
• 2014

Purpose: This study is research of the conditions which causes difference between the refractive power of the measurement of autorefractometer and the prescription using phoropter. Methods: Autorefractometer (SR-7000) and phoroptor (AV-9000) were used to measure 60 eyes of 30 participants who had no eye diseases and wore the corrective lens due to Ametropia. To prevent the dependence of the prescription value of the refractive power on the testers, two testers measured the refractive power of the eyes of the participants at the same measuring conditions. Results: Statistically, the prescribed values of the refractive power by two testers were not significantly different. Most of the prescribed values of the refractive power were smaller than the refractive power by autorefractometer In case of myopic eyes, the difference between refractive powers by the measurement of autorefractometer and the prescription using phoropter showed the trend of increase as the spherical refractive power became larger. The result was analyzed by the range of the different cylindrical refractive power for the myopic astigmatic eyes. In this case, the difference between refractive powers showed the trend of decrease as the cylindrical refractive power became larger. Conclusions: No difference between the prescribed value by two testers was observed. In case of myopic or myopic astigmatic eyes, the difference between refractive powers by autorefractometer and the prescription were measured to be approximately proportional to the refractive powers of ametropic eyes. As the this difference become larger for the participant who needs the lens of larger refractive power, additional caution is needed in the prescription of the refractive power of the corrective lens.