Przekoracka-Krawczyk Anna, Brenk-Krakowska Alicja, Wojtczak-Kwaśniewska Monika
Laboratory of Vision Science and Optometry, Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.
PLoS One. 2025 Jun 2;20(5):e0323750. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323750. eCollection 2025.
Uncorrected or undercorrected refractive errors affect 153 million individuals globally, leading to vision impairment and associated quality of life issues. Accurate measurement of refractive errors in children especially with strabismus is critical for effective management. This study evaluates the agreement between near retinoscopy (Mohindra retinoscopy) and cycloplegic autorefractometry in measuring refractive errors among children diagnosed with strabismus.
Forty-three strabismic children (18 males, 25 females; ages 3-10 years; mean age 5.5 yo) underwent refractive error evaluations using both methods: Mohindra retinoscopy and cycloplegic autorefractometry. The study assessed spherical component, spherical equivalent, cylinder power, and cylinder vectors J0 and J45. Statistical analyses, including Wilcoxon test Student's t-test, Bland-Altman analysis, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) analysis and correlations (supplementary analysis) evaluated differences, correlations and agreement between the two methods.
The median spherical component of refractive error was almost equal for both methods used (+4.38 D vs. + 4.50, for Mohindra retinoscopy and cycloplegic autorefractometry, respectively; P = .54), as well as median spherical refractive equivalent (+4.25 for both methods; P = .29). Mean spherical components of refractive errors were nearly identical across both methods, showing Mohindra retinoscopy provided slightly higher hyperopic measurements (0.03 D more positive), whereas spherical equivalent of refractive error showed 0.07 D more positive results for Mohindra retinoscopy than cycloplegic autorefractometry. Median cylinder powers were the same for both methods (-0.50 D; P = .25). No differences were also found for J0 (P = .91) and J45 vectors (P = .88) between Mohindra retinoscopy and cycloplegic autorefractometry.
Near retinoscopy demonstrates comparable accuracy to cycloplegic autorefractometry in children with strabismus. These findings suggest that Mohindra retinoscopy may be used effectively without the need for cycloplegic intervention during follow-up visits, though further research is warranted to confirm its applicability.
未矫正或矫正不足的屈光不正影响全球1.53亿人,导致视力损害及相关生活质量问题。准确测量儿童尤其是斜视儿童的屈光不正对于有效治疗至关重要。本研究评估了在测量斜视患儿屈光不正时,近检影法(莫欣德拉检影法)与睫状肌麻痹自动验光法之间的一致性。
43名斜视儿童(18名男性,25名女性;年龄3 - 10岁;平均年龄5.5岁)使用莫欣德拉检影法和睫状肌麻痹自动验光法这两种方法进行了屈光不正评估。该研究评估了球镜成分、球镜等效度、柱镜度数以及柱镜矢量J0和J45。包括威尔科克森检验、学生t检验、布兰德 - 奥特曼分析、组内相关系数(ICC)分析和相关性分析(补充分析)在内的统计分析评估了两种方法之间的差异、相关性和一致性。
两种方法所测屈光不正的球镜成分中位数几乎相等(莫欣德拉检影法为 +4.38 D,睫状肌麻痹自动验光法为 +4.50 D;P = 0.54),球镜等效度中位数也相等(两种方法均为 +4.25;P = 0.29)。两种方法的屈光不正球镜成分均值几乎相同,显示莫欣德拉检影法提供的远视测量值略高(正0.03 D),而屈光不正的球镜等效度显示莫欣德拉检影法比睫状肌麻痹自动验光法的结果正0.07 D。两种方法的柱镜度数中位数相同(-0.50 D;P = 0.25)。莫欣德拉检影法与睫状肌麻痹自动验光法在J0(P = 0.91)和J45矢量(P = 0.88)方面也未发现差异。
在斜视儿童中,近检影法显示出与睫状肌麻痹自动验光法相当的准确性。这些发现表明,在随访期间,莫欣德拉检影法无需睫状肌麻痹干预即可有效使用,不过仍需进一步研究以证实其适用性。