July 2018
Volume 59, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2018
REPEATABILITY OF THE VMAX VOICE ACTIV SUBJECTIVE REFRACTOR (VASR) AND TRADITIONAL REFRACTIVE METHODS IN A HEALTHY POPULATION
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Christina Newman
    Southern College of Optometry, Memphis, Tennessee, United States
  • Christopher Lievens
    Southern College of Optometry, Memphis, Tennessee, United States
  • Alan Kabat
    Southern College of Optometry, Memphis, Tennessee, United States
  • Jacob Weber
    Southern College of Optometry, Memphis, Tennessee, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Christina Newman, None; Christopher Lievens, None; Alan Kabat, VMax (C); Jacob Weber, VMax (R)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2018, Vol.59, 1284. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Christina Newman, Christopher Lievens, Alan Kabat, Jacob Weber; REPEATABILITY OF THE VMAX VOICE ACTIV SUBJECTIVE REFRACTOR (VASR) AND TRADITIONAL REFRACTIVE METHODS IN A HEALTHY POPULATION
      . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):1284.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The Vmax VASR (Voice Activ Subjective Refractor) is a new digital refracting platform that utilizes wavefront aberrometry and point spread function (PSF) technology combined with computer-generated artificial intelligence to conduct a complete objective and subjective refraction. In a clinical study, we compared the results obtained with the VASR to traditional refraction performed by an experienced optometrist.

Methods : Fifty healthy subjects were examined by a masked investigator using a standard autorefractor (Nidek TonoRef II) as an objective measurement, followed by subjective refinement through the phoropter (monocular subjective refraction with binocular balance). Subjects were then evaluated by a different investigator using the VASR to obtain an objective and subjective refraction result. This process of evaluation by autorefractor, subjective phoropter refraction and VASR refraction was repeated twice: once later on same day as the initial evaluation, and again on a subsequent date to validate the repeatability of the measurements.

Results : A total of three refractive assessments were obtained for each subject using each of the three methods previously mentioned, and the data was assessed by analysis of variance (ANOVA). The average differences noted upon repeat testing of spherical power were 0.02 D for the autorefractor (p=0.62), 0.02 D for the subjective/phoropter refraction (p=0.55) and 0.07 D for the VASR (p=0.58). The average differences noted upon repeat testing of cylinder power were 0.01 D for the autorefractor (p=0.49), 0.02 D for the phoropter refraction (p=0.11) and 0.03 D for the VASR (p=0.39). The average differences noted upon repeat testing of spherical equivalent power were 0.03 D for the autorefractor (p=0.43), 0.01 D for the phoropter refraction (p=0.98) and 0.10 D for the VASR (p=0.23). For all refractive methods, the differences between measurements amounted to ≤ 0.10 diopters, which is neither clinically nor statistically significant in terms of repeatability.

Conclusions : Over this cohort, the Vmax VASR demonstrated clinically and statistically significant repeatability of measurement with regard to sphere power, cylinder power and spherocylindrical power. The repeatability of VASR was consistent with the other refractive modalities tested, including autorefraction and subjective or “manual” refraction using the phoropter.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2018 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, April 29 - May 3, 2018.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×