Abstract
Purpose :
The determination of subjective far and near refractions is a central part of an optometric examination and its determination is yet to be challenged. Still, more and more digital and algorithm-based methods are available. This study investigated whether the algorithm-guided subjective far refraction (QuickPro) of the EyeRefract VX160 and its near refraction determination is comparable with a conventional, subjective refraction determination.
Methods :
96 persons took part in this study (spherical equivalent M = - 11.39 D to + 6.26 D, age: 39 ± 15 years). Two types of measurements were compared: QuickPro (algorithm-guided subjective far refraction) vs. conventional procedure (DNEye® Scanner 2 and subjective refraction). The near refraction (addition) was carried out both using the EyeRefract (Jackson-Cross method) and using a trial frame and Duane`s figure.
Results :
The differences between the two methods (QuickPro vs. DNEye® Scanner 2 + subjective refraction) showed statistically significant but clinically irrelevant differences: ΔM = - 0.20 ± 0.35 D (p < 0.001); ΔJ0 = 0.07 ± 0.14 D (p < 0.001); ΔJ45 = - 0.02 ± 0.13 D (p = 0.445). A subjective refraction based on the aberrometer measurement (DNEye® Scanner 2) took 10.55 ± 2.34 min while a QuickPro measurement 6.77 ± 2.14 min.
Statistically significant differences were found for the addition values (EyeRefract VX160: +1.06 ± 0.90 D, trial frame: +0.70 ± 0.80 D, p < 0.001) as well as its measurement time (EyeRefract VX160: 2.18 ± 0.84 min, trial frame: 4.36 ± 1.60 min, p < 0.001).
Conclusions :
The refraction determination with the EyeRefract VX160 requires significantly less time for both the QuickPro measurement and the addition determination than a conventional procedure. In around 90% of all cases, QuickPro algorithm achieved precise measurement results across all correction values, which correspond to those of a conventional refraction determination.
This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.