![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Background
The aim was to compare outcome measures of refractive error by the Plusoptix S08 photorefractor with measures obtained by retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy in children.
Method
The refractive error of the right eye of 144 non‐strabismic children, aged 2.5 to 5.5 years, was determined by Plusoptix S08 photorefraction, retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy. Agreement between outcome measures of refractive error (spherical error, cylindrical error and spherical equivalent) by the three techniques were tested by Bland–Altman limits of agreement.
Results
The mean difference for spherical equivalent results of photorefraction (Pse) minus those of retinoscopy (Rse) and photorefraction minus those of cycloretinoscopy (CRse) were +0.53 ± 0.62 and ‐0.22 ± 0.75-D, respectively. The 95 per cent limits of agreement for spherical photorefraction with retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy were ±1.22 D (range ‐0.69 to +1.75) and ±1.47 D (range ‐1.69 to +1.25), respectively. The mean difference for cylindrical results of photorefraction (Pc) minus those of retinoscopy (Rc) and Pc minus those of cycloretinoscopy (CRc) were +0.11 ± 0.39 D and +0.13 ± 0.44 D, respectively. The 95 per cent limits of agreement for Pc with Rc and CRc were ±0.76 D (range ‐0.65 to +0.87) and ±0.86 D (range ‐0.73 to +0.99), respectively. The mean and standard deviation of weighted axes difference, comparing Plusoptix S08 and retinoscopy was 0.25 ± 0.36 and comparing Plusoptix S08 and cycloretinoscopy was 0.29 ± 0.51. Eighty‐two per cent of the spherical equivalent findings in photorefraction and cycloretinoscopy show a difference of within 1.00 D. Regarding cylindrical power, this percentage is 96.6 per cent.
Conclusion
As the findings demonstrate a fairly good consistency between the results of the Plusoptix S08 Photorefractor without using cycloplegic agents and those of cycloretinoscopy, the Plusoptix S08 is a fairly accurate tool to estimate refractive errors of children in the limited working range of the instrument.
Acknowledgment
The authors have no financial interest in any of the products mentioned in the manuscript. This study was part of a MS thesis supported by Tehran University of Medical Sciences (grant No: P/828). We would like to extend our sincere appreciation to Mr Amir Mahdian, our non‐specialist trained staff, for his assistance and co‐operation in carrying out the photorefraction by Plusoptix S08.