Pujol Jaume, Ondategui-Parra Juan Carlos, Badiella Llorenç, Otero Carles, Vilaseca Meritxell, Aldaba Mikel
Davalor Research Center (DRC), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Terrassa, Spain.
Department of Applied Statistics, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain.
J Optom. 2017 Jan-Mar;10(1):43-51. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2015.12.005. Epub 2016 Feb 5.
To conduct a clinical validation of a virtual reality-based experimental system that is able to assess the spherical subjective refraction simplifying the methodology of ocular refraction.
For the agreement assessment, spherical refraction measurements were obtained from 104 eyes of 52 subjects using three different methods: subjectively with the experimental prototype (Subj.E) and the classical subjective refraction (Subj.C); and objectively with the WAM-5500 autorefractor (WAM). To evaluate precision (intra- and inter-observer variability) of each refractive tool independently, 26 eyes were measured in four occasions.
With regard to agreement, the mean difference (±SD) for the spherical equivalent (M) between the new experimental subjective method (Subj.E) and the classical subjective refraction (Subj.C) was -0.034D (±0.454D). The corresponding 95% Limits of Agreement (LoA) were (-0.856D, 0.924D). In relation to precision, intra-observer mean difference for the M component was 0.034±0.195D for the Subj.C, 0.015±0.177D for the WAM and 0.072±0.197D for the Subj.E. Inter-observer variability showed worse precision values, although still clinically valid (below 0.25D) in all instruments.
The spherical equivalent obtained with the new experimental system was precise and in good agreement with the classical subjective routine. The algorithm implemented in this new system and its optical configuration has been shown to be a first valid step for spherical error correction in a semiautomated way.
对一种基于虚拟现实的实验系统进行临床验证,该系统能够通过简化眼屈光方法来评估球面主观验光。
为进行一致性评估,使用三种不同方法从52名受试者的104只眼中获得球面屈光测量值:使用实验原型进行主观测量(Subj.E)和经典主观验光(Subj.C);使用WAM - 5500自动验光仪进行客观测量(WAM)。为独立评估每种屈光工具的精度(观察者内和观察者间变异性),对26只眼进行了四次测量。
关于一致性,新实验主观方法(Subj.E)与经典主观验光(Subj.C)之间的球镜等效度(M)平均差异(±标准差)为-0.034D(±0.454D)。相应的95%一致性界限(LoA)为(-0.856D,0.924D)。关于精度,观察者内M分量的平均差异对于Subj.C为0.034±0.195D,对于WAM为0.015±0.177D,对于Subj.E为0.072±0.197D。观察者间变异性显示精度值较差,尽管在所有仪器中仍具有临床有效性(低于0.25D)。
新实验系统获得的球镜等效度精确,与经典主观常规方法一致性良好。该新系统中实施的算法及其光学配置已被证明是以半自动方式进行球面误差校正的首个有效步骤。