Oman journal of ophthalmology · 2026
Comparison of refractive examination results in children with and without cycloplegia using retinoscopy and autorefractors.
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.
Mayasari Delvi Indera, Rimayanti Ulfah, Rahmah Marlyanti Nur, Syawal Purnamanita
Аннотация
CONTEXT: Uncorrected refractive errors are the most common cause of visual impairment and global blindness.
AIMS: This study aims to assess the accuracy of refractive error measurements using streak retinoscopy and autorefraction, both with and without administering cycloplegics, in children aged 4-10 years.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This study is an analytical observational research with a cross-sectional design.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted at an eye clinic from January 2020 to August 2020, with 90 subjects. The examination utilized 1% cyclopentolate cycloplegia administered twice within 1 h, along with retinoscopy and autorefractors.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
RESULTS: The study results indicate that (1) there was no significant difference in the mean spherical equivalent (SE) before cycloplegia between the two instruments (P = 0.630); (2) a significant difference in mean SE after cycloplegia was observed for both instruments (P < 0.001); (3) significant differences in mean SE after cycloplegia were noted for both instruments in cases of compound myopic astigmatism (P < 0.001), compound hyperopic astigmatism (P = 0.007), and mixed astigmatism (P = 0.001); and (4) examination of all subjects showed undercorrection of autorefractometry results compared to those of retinoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Retinoscopy and autorefractors yield different results for refractive error correction after cycloplegia. Therefore, autorefractor examination with cycloplegia cannot be considered a substitute for retinoscopy with cycloplegia.
AIMS: This study aims to assess the accuracy of refractive error measurements using streak retinoscopy and autorefraction, both with and without administering cycloplegics, in children aged 4-10 years.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This study is an analytical observational research with a cross-sectional design.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted at an eye clinic from January 2020 to August 2020, with 90 subjects. The examination utilized 1% cyclopentolate cycloplegia administered twice within 1 h, along with retinoscopy and autorefractors.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
RESULTS: The study results indicate that (1) there was no significant difference in the mean spherical equivalent (SE) before cycloplegia between the two instruments (P = 0.630); (2) a significant difference in mean SE after cycloplegia was observed for both instruments (P < 0.001); (3) significant differences in mean SE after cycloplegia were noted for both instruments in cases of compound myopic astigmatism (P < 0.001), compound hyperopic astigmatism (P = 0.007), and mixed astigmatism (P = 0.001); and (4) examination of all subjects showed undercorrection of autorefractometry results compared to those of retinoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Retinoscopy and autorefractors yield different results for refractive error correction after cycloplegia. Therefore, autorefractor examination with cycloplegia cannot be considered a substitute for retinoscopy with cycloplegia.