Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Subjective versus objective refraction in healthy young adults.
Kozlov, Yuval; Kinori, Michael; Armarnik, Sharon; Yahalomi, Tal; Ekshtein, Aya; Levian, Leora; Mezad-Koursh, Daphna; Pikkel, Joseph; Ben-Ari, Oded.
Afiliação
  • Kozlov Y; Department of Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
  • Kinori M; The Israeli Air Force Aeromedical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel.
  • Armarnik S; Department of Ophthalmology, Assuta Ashdod Medical Center, Ashdod, Israel. michaelkinori@gmail.com.
  • Yahalomi T; Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. michaelkinori@gmail.com.
  • Ekshtein A; The Goldschleger Eye Institute, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel.
  • Levian L; Department of Ophthalmology, Assuta Ashdod Medical Center, Ashdod, Israel.
  • Mezad-Koursh D; Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.
  • Pikkel J; Department of Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
  • Ben-Ari O; The Israeli Air Force Aeromedical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel.
BMC Ophthalmol ; 24(1): 79, 2024 Feb 20.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38378511
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To evaluate objective and subjective refraction differences in healthy young adults.

METHODS:

Data concerning candidates for the Israeli Air Force Flight Academy, as well as active air force pilots in all stages of service who underwent a routine health checkup between the years 2018 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Objective refraction measured using a single autorefractometer was compared with subjective refraction measured by an experienced military optometrist during the same visit. The results were converted to power vectors (spherical equivalent [SE], J0, and J45). To interpret astigmatism using power vector values, the cylinder power (Cp) was determined.

RESULTS:

This study included 1,395 young adult participants. The average age was 22.17 years (range, 17-39, 84.8% males). The average SE was - 0.65 ± 1.19 diopter (D) compared with - 0.71 ± 0.91D in the auto- and subjective refraction, respectively (p = 0.001). Cp was 0.91 ± 0.52D and 0.67 ± 0.40D, respectively (p < 0.001). This difference was more common in older participants (p < 0.001). J0 and J45 value differences were not significant. The absolute SE value of subjective refraction was lower in the myopic (p < 0.001) and hyperopic (p < 0.001) patients.

CONCLUSIONS:

Young hyperopic participants tended to prefer "less plus" in subjective refraction compared with autorefraction. Young myopic participants tended to prefer "less minus" in subjective refraction compared with autorefraction. All participants, but mainly older participants, preferred slightly "less Cp" than that measured using autorefraction; The astigmatic axis did not differ significantly between the methods.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hiperopia / Miopia Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: BMC Ophthalmol Assunto da revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Israel

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hiperopia / Miopia Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: BMC Ophthalmol Assunto da revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Israel