1 / 10

Prospective Comparison of Manifest Refraction with Autorefraction Before and After Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis

Prospective Comparison of Manifest Refraction with Autorefraction Before and After Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis. Joel D. Hunter MD Frank Schwendeman OD Daniel S. Durrie MD Durrie Vision Overland Park, KS. Drs. Hunter and Schwendeman have no financial relationships to disclose

washington
Télécharger la présentation

Prospective Comparison of Manifest Refraction with Autorefraction Before and After Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prospective Comparison of Manifest Refraction with Autorefraction Before and After Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis Joel D. Hunter MD Frank Schwendeman OD Daniel S. Durrie MD Durrie Vision Overland Park, KS

  2. Drs. Hunter and Schwendeman have no financial relationships to disclose Presently Dr. Durrie is a clinical investigator for: Alcon Allergan AMO Bausch and Lomb IntraLase Refractec Acufocus WaveTec Avedro Encore Vision LenSx Wavefront Science NeuroVision High Performance Optics OcuSense QuestVision Visiometrics Tracey Technologies High Performance Optics Topcon Ocular Optics Potential Conflicts of Interest

  3. Purpose To evaluate accuracy of autorefraction compared with manifest refraction To investigate whether the traditional phoropter is still the “gold standard” for accurate pre- or post-operative evaluation in a refractive surgery practice

  4. Study Design • 3-month prospective clinical trial includes 300 eyes at pre-operative, 1-month and 3-month post-operative visits for Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis • Myopia or hyperopia with or without astigmatism were treated with SBK using the IntraLase for flap creation and the Allegretto Wavelight for ablation. • Two consecutive measurements at each visit: • Nidek ARK-530A • Topcon KR-8800 • Nidek OPD-Scan II

  5. Results - Accuracy These results are concerned with how far away the patient's average autorefraction is from the "true" value (manifest) Because refractions are a combination of sphere and cylinder, comparison can only be done by vector analysis Vector manipulations were used to determine the error

  6. Autorefractor vs. MRx Histograms

  7. Autorefractor vs. MRx Double-Angle Plots

  8. Results - Repeatability • These results are concerned with the difference between the values of the 1st and 2nd measurement on the same device • The “distance” between the measurements was based on the magnitude of the vector difference between measurements (i.e. vector analysis)

  9. Results - Repeatability • Manifest Refraction – most disparity • Spherical Equivalent: 0.17 D • Cylinder: 0.23 D • Nidek ARK-530A – least disparity • Spherical Equivalent: 0.07 D • Cylinder 0.11 D • Topcon KR-8800 • Spherical equivalent: 0.12 D • Cylinder: 0.12 D • OPD-Scan II • Spherical equivalent: 0.14 D • Cylinder: 0.15 D

  10. Interpretation Modern autorefraction is within 0.27 D of spherical equivalent and 0.32 D of cylinder or less, depending on the device used, when compared to manifest refraction. Modern autorefraction is highly repeatable, with spherical equivalent and cylinder changes averaging <0.25 D for all three machines tested.

More Related