System for Objective Assessment of the Accommodation Response During Subjective Refraction.

Purpose: To evaluate a system based on a Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor attached to a phoropter that allows the user to obtain real-time information about the refractive state of the eye and the accommodation response (AR). Methods: The objective refractions (ME) and ARs of 73 subjects (50 women, 23 men; ages, 19-69 years) were assessed with the system developed while placing in the phoropter the subjective refraction (MS) plus a set of trial lenses with differences in spherical equivalent power (ΔM) between ±2 diopters (D). Results: The objective estimations (ME) showed a good correlation with the subjective values (MS) (r = 0.989; P < 0.001). The means of the ARs presented a region where the accommodation remained stable (ΔM from +2 D to about 0 D), followed by another in which the response increased progressively (ΔM from about 0 to -2 D) with the magnitude of the accommodation stimulus. The analysis of variance within subjects applied to ARs introducing age and MS as covariates showed an increasing effect size of age from medium to large between ΔM of -0.5 and -2 D. In contrast, MS had a medium effect size (between ΔM of +2 and 0 D). Conclusions: The implemented system permitted an objective estimation of the refraction of the eye and its AR. Because it is coupled to a phoropter, the system can be used to retrieve the AR during subjective refraction procedures. Translational Relevance: The developed system can be used as a supporting tool during subjective refraction to provide certainty about the true state of accommodation.

Suitability of open-field autorefractors as pupillometers and instrument design effects.

AIM: To determine the agreement and repeatability of the pupil measurement obtained with VIP-200 (Neuroptics), PowerRef II (Plusoptix), WAM-5500 (Grand Seiko) and study the effects of instrument design on pupillometry. METHODS: Forty patients were measured twice in low, mid and high mesopic. Repeatability was analyzed with the within-subject standard deviation (Sw) and paired t-tests. Agreement was studied with Bland-Altman plots and repeated measures ANOVA. Instrument design analysis consisted on measuring pupil size with PowerRef II simulating monocular and binocular conditions as well as with proximity cues and without proximity cues. RESULTS: The mean difference (±standard deviation) between test-retest for low, mid and high mesopic conditions were, respectively: -0.09 (±0.16), -0.05 (±0.18) and -0.08 (±0.23) mm for Neuroptics, -0.05 (±0.17), -0.12 (±0.23) and -0.17 (±0.34) mm for WAM-5500, -0.04 (±0.27), -0.13 (±0.37) and -0.11 (±0.28) mm for PowerRef II. Regarding agreement with Neuroptics, the mean difference for low, mid and high mesopic conditions were, respectively: -0.48 (±0.35), -0.83 (±0.52) and -0.38 (±0.56) mm for WAM-5500, -0.28 (±0.56), -0.70 (±0.55) and -0.61 (±0.54) mm for PowerRef II. The mean difference of binocular minus monocular pupil measurements was: -0.83 (±0.87) mm; and with proximity cues minus without proximity cues was: -0.30 (±0.77) mm. CONCLUSION: All the instruments show similar repeat-ability. In all illumination conditions, agreement of Neuroptics with WAM-5500 and PowerRef II is not good enough, which can be partially induced due to their open field design.