Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 65, Issue 7
June 2024
Volume 65, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2024
Comparison of Three Methods for Calculating Objective Refraction from Wavefront Measurements with Manifest Refraction
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Xifeng Xiao
    Research and Development, Wavefront Dynamics Inc, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
  • Daniel R Neal
    Research and Development, Wavefront Dynamics Inc, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
  • Christine W Sindt
    Ophthalmology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Xifeng Xiao Wavefront Dynamics Inc, Code E (Employment); Daniel Neal Wavefront Dynamics Inc, Code E (Employment); Christine Sindt Oculus, Code E (Employment)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2024, Vol.65, 5444. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Xifeng Xiao, Daniel R Neal, Christine W Sindt; Comparison of Three Methods for Calculating Objective Refraction from Wavefront Measurements with Manifest Refraction. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2024;65(7):5444.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The aim of this study was to evaluate three methods of calculating objective refraction based on the measured wavefront aberration, with a comparison to subjective refraction. This study aimed to gain a comprehensive understanding of refraction and intended to enhance the estimation of the objective refraction accuracy by taking into account all aberrations.

Methods : In this study, method 1’s refraction is given by second-order Zernike coefficients of the eye aberration: M1 = C20*4sqrt(3)/R2. Method 2 is calculated by the Zernike expansion of the Seidel formula for defocus: M2 = (C204sqrt(3) - C4012sqrt(5) + C6024sqrt(7))/R2. Method 3, as illustrated in Figure 1, is obtained by optimizing the visual Strehl ratio based on the optical transfer function (VSOTF). The method follows the same procedure for optometrists to measure eye prescriptions. The three methods were applied to 20 bare eyes with the higher order aberrations RMS (root mean square) from low to high. They were compared to the corresponding manifest counterparts.

Results : In general, the refraction obtained from the three approaches demonstrated reasonably good accuracy in predicting subjective refraction, especially in low RMS scenarios. For patients with medium to high RMS aberrations, M1 and M2 do not always match, but are quite close in many cases for M2. M3 was generally better than the other two methods.

Conclusions : Objective refraction obtained from this optimal VSOTF approach provides a method that includes all aberrations and also integrates the neural contrast sensitivity function. It demonstrated a relatively high accuracy in the prediction of manifest refraction. All three methods provide similar outcomes, as a result, the method has the potential to match a wide range of manifest refractions.

This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.

 

Figure 1: Procedure of calculating M3 via optimal VSOTF. It starts from finding (a) axis, then (2) cylinder (negative cylinder is used), and (c) sphere.

Figure 1: Procedure of calculating M3 via optimal VSOTF. It starts from finding (a) axis, then (2) cylinder (negative cylinder is used), and (c) sphere.

×
×

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.

×