Comparing low-cost handheld autorefractors: A practical approach to measuring refraction in low-resource settings.
PLoS One
; 14(10): e0219501, 2019.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-31614363
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE:
To compare and validate the accuracy and ease of use of handheld autorefractors against retinoscopic refraction by an ophthalmologist for assessing the visual acuity of older adults in India.METHODS:
190 patients were enrolled at the Sankara Eye Hospital in Bangalore, India, to undergo refraction using three different handheld devices-Retinomax (Nikon Inc., Japan), Netra (Eyenetra, Inc., USA), and QuickSee (PlenOptika, Inc., USA)-and the results were compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy and refraction done by an ophthalmologist. We analyzed the mean, standard deviation (S.D.), and Bland-Altman comparison of dioptric (D) power accuracy.RESULTS:
The difference between the handheld devices and subjective refraction for each device was Retinomax (N = 186), mean -0.41 D, S.D. 2.14; Netra (N = 179), mean 0.61 D, S.D. 2.20; and QuickSee (N = 182), mean -0.05 D, S.D. 1.04.CONCLUSION:
The QuickSee and the Retinomax may be used successfully as refraction screening tools in epidemiologic studies of adults in India and as diagnostic tools in low-resource settings.
Texto completo:
1
Bases de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Refracción Ocular
/
Errores de Refracción
/
Agudeza Visual
/
Retinoscopía
Tipo de estudio:
Clinical_trials
/
Health_economic_evaluation
Límite:
Adult
/
Aged
/
Aged80
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
/
Middle aged
País/Región como asunto:
Asia
Idioma:
En
Revista:
PLoS One
Asunto de la revista:
CIENCIA
/
MEDICINA
Año:
2019
Tipo del documento:
Article
País de afiliación:
Estados Unidos