首页   按字顺浏览 期刊浏览 卷期浏览 Measurement of Refractive Errors in Young Myopes Using the COAS Shack-Hartmann Aberrome...
Measurement of Refractive Errors in Young Myopes Using the COAS Shack-Hartmann Aberrometer

 

作者: THOMAS,   SALMON ROGER,   WEST WAYNE,   GASSER and TODD,  

 

期刊: Optometry and Vision Science  (OVID Available online 2003)
卷期: Volume 80, issue 1  

页码: 6-14

 

ISSN:1040-5488

 

年代: 2003

 

出版商: OVID

 

关键词: wavefront;aberration;aberrometer;Shack-Hartmann;automated refraction;accuracy;repeatabililty;instrument myopia;refractive error

 

数据来源: OVID

 

摘要:

Purpose.To evaluate the Complete Ophthalmic Analysis System (COAS; WaveFront Science) for accuracy, repeatability, and instrument myopia when measuring myopic refractive errors.Methods.We measured the refractive errors of 20 myopic subjects (+0.25 to −10 D sphere; 0 to −1.75 D cylinder) with a COAS, a phoropter, and a Nidek ARK-2000 autorefractor. Measurements were made for right and left eyes, with and without cycloplegia, and data were analyzed for large and small pupils. We used the phoropter refraction as our estimate of the true refractive error, so accuracy was defined as the difference between phoropter refraction and that of the COAS and autorefractor. Differences and means were computed using power vectors, and accuracy was summarized in terms of mean vector and mean spherocylindrical power errors. To assess repeatability, we computed the mean vector deviation for each of five measurements from the mean power vector and computed a coefficient of repeatability. Instrument myopia was defined as the difference between cycloplegic and noncycloplegic refractions for the same eyes.Results.Without cycloplegia, both the COAS and autorefractor had mean power vector errors of 0.3 to 0.4 D. Cycloplegia improved autorefractor accuracy by 0.1 D, but COAS accuracy remained the same. For large pupils, COAS accuracy was best when Zernike mode Z40(primary spherical aberration) was included in the computation of sphere power. COAS repeatability was slightly better than autorefraction repeatability. Mean instrument myopia for the COAS was not significantly different from zero.Conclusions.When measuring myopes, COAS accuracy, repeatability, and instrument myopia were similar to those of the autorefractor. Error margins for both were better than the accuracy of subjective refraction. We conclude that in addition to its capability to measure higher-order aberrations, the COAS can be used as a reliable, accurate autorefractor.

 

点击下载:  PDF (377KB)



返 回