Kara Caner, Petricli Ikbal Seza
Department of Ophthalmology, Etlik Zübeyde Hanım Women's Health Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Beyoglu Eye J. 2021 Feb 13;6(1):54-61. doi: 10.14744/bej.2021.09825. eCollection 2021.
This study was designed to assess the accuracy of photorefraction and wavefront-based autorefraction in children under 3 years of age.
A cross-sectional study was performed with children who had no ocular abnormalities other than a refractive error and were less than 3 years old. Spot Vision Screener (Welch Allyn Inc., Skaneateles Falls, NY, USA) was used for photorefraction and SureSight Vision Screener (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY) was used for autorefraction. The measurements were performed with both devices before and after cycloplegia. The results were compared with those obtained using cycloplegic retinoscopy. The assessments were performed in terms of spherical equivalent (SE) values and Jackson cross-cylinder power values (J0 and J45).
A total of 305 children with a mean age of 15.1±10.4 months were included. The mean SE values measured with the Spot Vision and SureSight before cycloplegia were 0.43±0.75 D and 0.90±0.86 D, respectively. Following cycloplegia, the mean SE values were 1.80±1.25 D and 1.55±1.40 D, respectively. The mean SE value obtained with cycloplegic retinoscopy was 1.53±1.34 D. The mean SE values measured with both devices prior to cycloplegia were significantly lower than that measured with cycloplegic retinoscopy (p<0.001). No significant difference was observed between the cycloplegic SE values obtained with SureSight and retinoscopy (p=0.66). Spot Vision yielded significantly higher cycloplegic SE values compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy (p<0.001).
Both devices underestimated SE values in comparison with cycloplegic retinoscopy in children under 3 years of age. Wavefront-based autorefraction performed with cycloplegia may be an alternative to cycloplegic retinoscopy, but needs confirmation.
本研究旨在评估三岁以下儿童的验光仪验光和基于波前像差的自动验光的准确性。
对除屈光不正外无眼部异常且年龄小于三岁的儿童进行了一项横断面研究。使用Spot Vision Screener（美国纽约州斯卡奈特勒斯福尔斯韦尔奇·阿林公司）进行验光仪验光，使用SureSight Vision Screener（美国纽约州斯卡奈特勒斯福尔斯韦尔奇·阿林公司）进行自动验光。在睫状肌麻痹前后使用这两种设备进行测量。将结果与使用睫状肌麻痹检影验光获得的结果进行比较。根据等效球镜度（SE）值和交叉柱镜度数（J0和J45）进行评估。
共纳入305名平均年龄为15.1±10.4个月的儿童。睫状肌麻痹前，用Spot Vision和SureSight测量的平均SE值分别为0.43±0.75 D和0.90±0.86 D。睫状肌麻痹后，平均SE值分别为1.80±1.25 D和1.55±1.40 D。睫状肌麻痹检影验光获得的平均SE值为1.53±1.34 D。睫状肌麻痹前用这两种设备测量的平均SE值均显著低于睫状肌麻痹检影验光测量的值（p<0.001）。SureSight获得的睫状肌麻痹SE值与检影验光之间未观察到显著差异（p=0.66）。与睫状肌麻痹检影验光相比，Spot Vision产生的睫状肌麻痹SE值显著更高（p<0.001）。
与睫状肌麻痹检影验光相比，这两种设备在三岁以下儿童中均低估了SE值。睫状肌麻痹下基于波前像差进行的自动验光可能是睫状肌麻痹检影验光的替代方法，但需要进一步证实。
