Journal of optometry · 2019
Keratometry in children: Comparison between auto-refractokeratometer, rotating scheimpflug imaging, and biograph.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Hashemi Hassan, Heydarian Samira, Khabazkhoob Mehdi, Yekta Abbasali, Emamian Mohammad Hassan, Fotouhi Akbar
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the agreement and validity of keratometric measurements in children with the Nidek ARK-510A auto-refractokeratometer compared to rotating Scheimpflug imaging with Pentacam and biograph with Lenstar LS 900.
METHODS: This study was conducted on 5620 schoolchildren aged 6-12 years in Shahroud, Iran. Minimum and maximum keratometry values and corneal astigmatism magnitude were compared by calculation of Paired difference, interclass correlation coefficient, and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) between devices.
RESULTS: After applying the exclusion criteria, 4215 right eyes were enrolled into the study. Mean minimum keratometry with Nidek ARK-510A, Pentacam, and Lenstar was 43.13±1.51, 43.14±1.48, and 42.87±1.46 diopters (D), respectively, and mean maximum keratometry was 43.97±1.59, 44.00±1.56, and 43.75±1.54D, respectively. Nidek ARK-510A overestimated minimum and maximum keratometry by 0.25±0.37 and 0.22±0.41, respectively, compared to Penatcam. The LoA between Nidek ARK-510A and Pentacam for minimum and maximum keratometry measurements were -0.98 to 0.47D and -1.02 to 0.57D, respectively. The LoA between Nidek ARK-510A and Lenstar for minimum and maximum keratometry measurements were -0.70 to 0.72D and -0.79 to 0.85D, respectively. The agreement between devices was best in emmetropes, worst in hyperopes. For astigmatic vector components, the agreements between devices were poor but best agreement was between Nidek ARK-510A and Pentacam.
CONCLUSIONS: Keratometry measurement with Nidek ARK-510A was not significantly different from Pentacam and Lenstar, and this device can be used in screening programs in emmetropes.
METHODS: This study was conducted on 5620 schoolchildren aged 6-12 years in Shahroud, Iran. Minimum and maximum keratometry values and corneal astigmatism magnitude were compared by calculation of Paired difference, interclass correlation coefficient, and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) between devices.
RESULTS: After applying the exclusion criteria, 4215 right eyes were enrolled into the study. Mean minimum keratometry with Nidek ARK-510A, Pentacam, and Lenstar was 43.13±1.51, 43.14±1.48, and 42.87±1.46 diopters (D), respectively, and mean maximum keratometry was 43.97±1.59, 44.00±1.56, and 43.75±1.54D, respectively. Nidek ARK-510A overestimated minimum and maximum keratometry by 0.25±0.37 and 0.22±0.41, respectively, compared to Penatcam. The LoA between Nidek ARK-510A and Pentacam for minimum and maximum keratometry measurements were -0.98 to 0.47D and -1.02 to 0.57D, respectively. The LoA between Nidek ARK-510A and Lenstar for minimum and maximum keratometry measurements were -0.70 to 0.72D and -0.79 to 0.85D, respectively. The agreement between devices was best in emmetropes, worst in hyperopes. For astigmatic vector components, the agreements between devices were poor but best agreement was between Nidek ARK-510A and Pentacam.
CONCLUSIONS: Keratometry measurement with Nidek ARK-510A was not significantly different from Pentacam and Lenstar, and this device can be used in screening programs in emmetropes.