Clinical & experimental optometry · 2021
Performance of a photoscreener in detecting accommodation spasm.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Demir Mehmet Siraç, Muhafiz Ersin
Аннотация
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For a correct spectacle prescription, accommodation spasm should not be overlooked in the measurements made using an autorefractometer. Although this can be easily understood with cycloplegia, it is not practical. Therefore, investigating practical methods that can predict excess accommodation will be useful in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the performance of a photoscreener in detecting pseudo-myopia due to accommodation spasm and whether it eliminates the need for cycloplegia.
METHODS: Study was conducted in Van Training and Research Hospital. The manifest refraction of the patients was measured using an by an autorefractometer followed by a photoscreener before cycloplegia. Cycloplegic refraction errors were detected using an autorefractometer. Patients with pseudo-myopia due to accommodation spasm were diagnosed by observing a significant hyperopic shift in cycloplegic autorefractometer values compared to the non-cycloplegic values and were included in study. Cycloplegic autorefractometer and non-cycloplegic photoscreener measurements were compared.
RESULTS: The mean non-cycloplegic autorefractometer values were as follows: --6.34 ± 1.29D, -0.42 ± 0.58D, and -6.55 ± 1.36D for spherical, cylindrical, and spherical equivalents, respectively. These values were 0.23 ± 0.63D, -0.21 ± 0.41D, and 0.11 ± 0.73D for cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements, respectively. Cycloplegic autorefractometer values showed a significant hyperopic shift of 6.57 ± 1.26D and 6.67 ± 1.34D for spherical and spherical equivalents, respectively, compared to non-cycloplegic values (p < 0.001 for both). There was no significant difference between non-cycloplegic photoscreener and cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements for spherical, cylindrical, and spherical equivalents (p = 0.126, p = 0.078, and p = 0.053, respectively). . There was agreement between the measurements in the Bland-Altman graph.
CONCLUSION: There was consistency between non-cycloplegic photoscreener and cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements in patients with pseudomyopia due to accommodation spasm. Therefore, photoscreener measurements can be a fast, practical, cost-effective examination method for screening these patients without the need for cycloplegia.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the performance of a photoscreener in detecting pseudo-myopia due to accommodation spasm and whether it eliminates the need for cycloplegia.
METHODS: Study was conducted in Van Training and Research Hospital. The manifest refraction of the patients was measured using an by an autorefractometer followed by a photoscreener before cycloplegia. Cycloplegic refraction errors were detected using an autorefractometer. Patients with pseudo-myopia due to accommodation spasm were diagnosed by observing a significant hyperopic shift in cycloplegic autorefractometer values compared to the non-cycloplegic values and were included in study. Cycloplegic autorefractometer and non-cycloplegic photoscreener measurements were compared.
RESULTS: The mean non-cycloplegic autorefractometer values were as follows: --6.34 ± 1.29D, -0.42 ± 0.58D, and -6.55 ± 1.36D for spherical, cylindrical, and spherical equivalents, respectively. These values were 0.23 ± 0.63D, -0.21 ± 0.41D, and 0.11 ± 0.73D for cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements, respectively. Cycloplegic autorefractometer values showed a significant hyperopic shift of 6.57 ± 1.26D and 6.67 ± 1.34D for spherical and spherical equivalents, respectively, compared to non-cycloplegic values (p < 0.001 for both). There was no significant difference between non-cycloplegic photoscreener and cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements for spherical, cylindrical, and spherical equivalents (p = 0.126, p = 0.078, and p = 0.053, respectively). . There was agreement between the measurements in the Bland-Altman graph.
CONCLUSION: There was consistency between non-cycloplegic photoscreener and cycloplegic autorefractometer measurements in patients with pseudomyopia due to accommodation spasm. Therefore, photoscreener measurements can be a fast, practical, cost-effective examination method for screening these patients without the need for cycloplegia.