Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Jesus, Daniela Lima de
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Villela, Flávio Fernandes, Orlandin, Luis Fernando, Eiji, Fernando Naves, Dantas, Daniel Oliveira, Alves, Milton Ruiz
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Clinics
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/111737
Resumo: OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an autorefractor by comparing refraction measurements to subjective clinical refractometry results in children and adult patients. METHODS: One-hundred and thirty-four eyes of 134 patients were submitted to refractometry by Spot and clinical refractometry under cycloplegia. Patients, students, physicians, staff and children of staff from the Hospital das Clínicas (School of Medicine, University of São Paulo) aged 7-50 years without signs of ocular disease were examined. Only right-eye refraction data were analyzed. The findings were converted in magnitude vectors for analysis. RESULTS: The difference between Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry expressed in spherical equivalents was +0.66±0.56 diopters (D), +0.16±0.27 D for the vector projected on the 90 axis and +0.02±0.15 D for the oblique vector. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the statistical significance of the difference between the two methods, we consider the difference non-relevant in a clinical setting, supporting the use of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an ancillary method for estimating refraction.
id USP-19_e32919d5045d7c60ff620cd18a6aba3d
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/111737
network_acronym_str USP-19
network_name_str Clinics
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an autorefractor by comparing refraction measurements to subjective clinical refractometry results in children and adult patients. METHODS: One-hundred and thirty-four eyes of 134 patients were submitted to refractometry by Spot and clinical refractometry under cycloplegia. Patients, students, physicians, staff and children of staff from the Hospital das Clínicas (School of Medicine, University of São Paulo) aged 7-50 years without signs of ocular disease were examined. Only right-eye refraction data were analyzed. The findings were converted in magnitude vectors for analysis. RESULTS: The difference between Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry expressed in spherical equivalents was +0.66±0.56 diopters (D), +0.16±0.27 D for the vector projected on the 90 axis and +0.02±0.15 D for the oblique vector. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the statistical significance of the difference between the two methods, we consider the difference non-relevant in a clinical setting, supporting the use of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an ancillary method for estimating refraction. Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2016-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/11173710.6061/clinics/2016(02)03Clinics; Vol. 71 No. 2 (2016); 69-72Clinics; v. 71 n. 2 (2016); 69-72Clinics; Vol. 71 Núm. 2 (2016); 69-721980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/111737/109741Copyright (c) 2016 Clinicsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessJesus, Daniela Lima deVillela, Flávio FernandesOrlandin, Luis FernandoEiji, Fernando NavesDantas, Daniel OliveiraAlves, Milton Ruiz2016-03-03T20:03:38Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/111737Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2016-03-03T20:03:38Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
title Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
spellingShingle Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
Jesus, Daniela Lima de
title_short Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
title_full Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
title_fullStr Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
title_sort Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry
author Jesus, Daniela Lima de
author_facet Jesus, Daniela Lima de
Villela, Flávio Fernandes
Orlandin, Luis Fernando
Eiji, Fernando Naves
Dantas, Daniel Oliveira
Alves, Milton Ruiz
author_role author
author2 Villela, Flávio Fernandes
Orlandin, Luis Fernando
Eiji, Fernando Naves
Dantas, Daniel Oliveira
Alves, Milton Ruiz
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Jesus, Daniela Lima de
Villela, Flávio Fernandes
Orlandin, Luis Fernando
Eiji, Fernando Naves
Dantas, Daniel Oliveira
Alves, Milton Ruiz
description OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an autorefractor by comparing refraction measurements to subjective clinical refractometry results in children and adult patients. METHODS: One-hundred and thirty-four eyes of 134 patients were submitted to refractometry by Spot and clinical refractometry under cycloplegia. Patients, students, physicians, staff and children of staff from the Hospital das Clínicas (School of Medicine, University of São Paulo) aged 7-50 years without signs of ocular disease were examined. Only right-eye refraction data were analyzed. The findings were converted in magnitude vectors for analysis. RESULTS: The difference between Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry expressed in spherical equivalents was +0.66±0.56 diopters (D), +0.16±0.27 D for the vector projected on the 90 axis and +0.02±0.15 D for the oblique vector. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the statistical significance of the difference between the two methods, we consider the difference non-relevant in a clinical setting, supporting the use of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an ancillary method for estimating refraction.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-02-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/111737
10.6061/clinics/2016(02)03
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/111737
identifier_str_mv 10.6061/clinics/2016(02)03
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/111737/109741
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Clinics
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Clinics
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Clinics; Vol. 71 No. 2 (2016); 69-72
Clinics; v. 71 n. 2 (2016); 69-72
Clinics; Vol. 71 Núm. 2 (2016); 69-72
1980-5322
1807-5932
reponame:Clinics
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Clinics
collection Clinics
repository.name.fl_str_mv Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br
_version_ 1800222762292215808