Comparison of the Retinomax hand-held autorefractor versus table-top autorefractor and retinoscopy.

AIM

To compare noncycloplegic and cycloplegic results of Retinomax measurements with findings achieved after cycloplegia using table-top autorefractor and retinoscopy.

METHODS

The study included 127 patients (mean age 96.7mo, range 21 to 221). Retinomax (Rmax) (Nikon Inc., Japan) was used to obtain noncycloplegic refraction. Under cycloplegia, refraction was measured with Rmax, table-top autorefractor (TTR) (Nikon NRK 8000, Inc., Japan) and retinoscopy. The values of sphere, spherical equivalent, cylinder and axis of cylinder were recorded for Rmax, TTR and retinoscopy in each eye. All results were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

THE MEAN SPHERIC VALUES (SV), SPHERICAL EQUIVALENT VALUES (SEV) AND CYLINDRICAL VALUES (CV) OF THE NONCYCLOPLEGIC RMAX (SV: 0.64 D, SEV: 0.65 D and CV: 0.03 D, respectively) were found to be significantly lower than cycloplegic TTR (1.43 D, 1.38 D and 0.3 D; P=0.012, P=0.011 and P=0.04, respectively) and retinoscopy (1.34 D, 1.45 D and 0.23 D; P=0.04, P=0.002 and P=0.045, respectively). Mean cycloplegic SV, SEV, CV were not significantly different between Rmax and TTR, Rmax and retinoscopy, TTR and retinoscopy. Cycloplegic or noncycloplegic axis values were not different between any method.

CONCLUSION

Rmax may be used successfully as a screening tool but may not be accurate enough for actual spectacle prescription. Cycloplegic Rmax measurements may be able to identify refractive error in children because of approximate results to retinoscopy.