Beyoglu eye journal · 2021
Comparison of Adult Refractive Disorder Measurements Using HandyRef-K, Retinomax, Plusoptix, and Table-top Autorefractometer Devices.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Seymen Zeynep, Bekmez Sinan, Eris Erdem, Yildiz Burcin Kepez, Vural Asli, Ogreden Tulin, Perente Irfan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to compare refractive error measurements recorded using the Nidek HandyRef-K handheld autorefractometer (HDY; Nidek Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), Plusoptix A09 photorefractor (PO; Plusoptix GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany), Retinomax K-plus 3 (RTX; Right Mfg. Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), and a table-mounted autorefractometer/keratometer (TTR; URK 800, Unicos Co. Ltd., Daejeon, Republic of Korea).
METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years underwent measurement of refraction without cycloplegia using 4 devices and the spherical power (SP), cylindrical power (CP), and spherical equivalent (SE) values were analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: A total of 181 eyes of 181 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.08±0.95 years (range: 18-79 years). There was a significantly significant difference in the SP, CP, and SE values determined by the devices (p<0.001). The SP and SE values of the RTX and the HDY were similar, while the other device results were different (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p=0.004). The CP values of the PO and the TTR, the HDY and the TTR were also comparable.
CONCLUSION: The HDY, RTX, and the PO are suitable for screening in clinical practice, but the findings strongly suggest that they should be used with caution.
METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years underwent measurement of refraction without cycloplegia using 4 devices and the spherical power (SP), cylindrical power (CP), and spherical equivalent (SE) values were analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: A total of 181 eyes of 181 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.08±0.95 years (range: 18-79 years). There was a significantly significant difference in the SP, CP, and SE values determined by the devices (p<0.001). The SP and SE values of the RTX and the HDY were similar, while the other device results were different (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p=0.004). The CP values of the PO and the TTR, the HDY and the TTR were also comparable.
CONCLUSION: The HDY, RTX, and the PO are suitable for screening in clinical practice, but the findings strongly suggest that they should be used with caution.