AIMTo evaluate intra-session repeatability and reproducibility of optical quality parameters measured at objective and subjective best focuses in a double-pass system.METHODSThirty Chinese healthy adults (19 to 40 yea...AIMTo evaluate intra-session repeatability and reproducibility of optical quality parameters measured at objective and subjective best focuses in a double-pass system.METHODSThirty Chinese healthy adults (19 to 40 years old) meeting our inclusion criterion were enrolled in the study. After a basic eye examination, two methods of optical quality measurement, based on subjective and objective best focuses were performed using the Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS) with an artificial pupil diameter of 4.0 mm.RESULTSWith each method, three consecutive measurements of the following parameters: the modulation transfer function cutoff frequency (MTF<sub>cutoff</sub>), the Strehl<sup>2D</sup> ratio, the OQAS values (OVs) at contrasts of 100%, 20%, 9% and the objective scatter index (OSI) were performed by an experienced examiner. The repeatability of each method was evaluated by the repeatability limit (RL) and the coefficient of repeatability (COR). Reproducibility of the two methods was evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and the 95% limits of agreement (Bland and Altman analysis). Thirty subjects, seven females and twenty three males, of whom 15 right eyes and 15 left eyes were selected randomly for recruitment in the study. The RLs (percentage) for the six parameters measured at objective focus and subjective focus ranged from 8.44% to 15.13% and 10.85% to 16.26%, respectively. The CORs for the two measurement methods ranged from 8.27% to 14.83% and 10.63% to 15.93%, respectively. With regard to reproducibility, the ICCs for the six parameters of OQAS ranged from 0.024 to 0.276. The 95% limits of agreement obtained for the six parameters (in comparison of the two methods) ranged from -0.57 to 42.18 (MTF<sub>cutoff</sub>), -0.01 to 0.23 (Strehl<sup>2D</sup> ratio), -0.02 to 1.40 (OV<sub>100%</sub>), -0.10 to 1.75 (OV<sub>20%</sub>), -0.14 to 1.80 (OV<sub>9%</sub>) and -1.46 to 0.18 (OSI).CONCLUSIONMeasurements provided by OQAS with either method showed a good repeatability. However, the results obtained from the two different measurement methods showed a poor reproducibility. These findings suggest that it might be best to evaluate patients' optical quality by OQAS using the best focus as chosen automatically by the instrument.展开更多
AIM:To evaluate the accuracy of spherical equivalent(SE) estimates of a double-pass system and to compare it with retinoscopy,subjective refraction and a table mounted autorefractor.METHODS:Non-cycloplegic refraction ...AIM:To evaluate the accuracy of spherical equivalent(SE) estimates of a double-pass system and to compare it with retinoscopy,subjective refraction and a table mounted autorefractor.METHODS:Non-cycloplegic refraction was performed on 125 eyes of 65 healthy adults(age 23.5±3.0 years) from October 2010 to January 2011 using retinoscopy,subjective refraction,autorefraction(Auto kerato refractometer TOPCON KR-8100,Japan) and a double pass system(Optical Quality Analysis System,OQAS,Visiometrics S.L.,Spain).Nine consecutive measurements with the double-pass system were performed on a subgroup of 22 eyes to assess repeatability.To evaluate the trueness of the OQAS instrument,the SE laboratory bias between the double pass system and the other techniques was calculated.RESULTS:The SE mean coefficient of repeatability obtained was 0.22D.Significant correlations could be established between the OQAS and the SE obtained with retinoscopy(r=0.956,P【0.001),subjective refraction(r=0.955,P【0.001) and autorefraction(r=0.957,P【0.001).The differences in SE between the double-pass system and the other techniques were significant(P【0.001),but lacked clinical relevance except for retinoscopy;Retinoscopy gave more hyperopic values than the double-pass system-0.51±0.50D as well as the subjective refraction-0.23±0.50D;More myopic values were achieved by means of autorefraction 0.24±0.49D. CONCLUSION:The double-pass system provides accurate and reliable estimates of the SE that can be used for clinical studies.This technique can determine the correct focus position to assess the ocular optical quality.However,it has a relatively small measuring range in comparison with autorefractors(-8.00 to +5.00D),and requires prior information on the refractive state of the patient.展开更多
文摘AIMTo evaluate intra-session repeatability and reproducibility of optical quality parameters measured at objective and subjective best focuses in a double-pass system.METHODSThirty Chinese healthy adults (19 to 40 years old) meeting our inclusion criterion were enrolled in the study. After a basic eye examination, two methods of optical quality measurement, based on subjective and objective best focuses were performed using the Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS) with an artificial pupil diameter of 4.0 mm.RESULTSWith each method, three consecutive measurements of the following parameters: the modulation transfer function cutoff frequency (MTF<sub>cutoff</sub>), the Strehl<sup>2D</sup> ratio, the OQAS values (OVs) at contrasts of 100%, 20%, 9% and the objective scatter index (OSI) were performed by an experienced examiner. The repeatability of each method was evaluated by the repeatability limit (RL) and the coefficient of repeatability (COR). Reproducibility of the two methods was evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and the 95% limits of agreement (Bland and Altman analysis). Thirty subjects, seven females and twenty three males, of whom 15 right eyes and 15 left eyes were selected randomly for recruitment in the study. The RLs (percentage) for the six parameters measured at objective focus and subjective focus ranged from 8.44% to 15.13% and 10.85% to 16.26%, respectively. The CORs for the two measurement methods ranged from 8.27% to 14.83% and 10.63% to 15.93%, respectively. With regard to reproducibility, the ICCs for the six parameters of OQAS ranged from 0.024 to 0.276. The 95% limits of agreement obtained for the six parameters (in comparison of the two methods) ranged from -0.57 to 42.18 (MTF<sub>cutoff</sub>), -0.01 to 0.23 (Strehl<sup>2D</sup> ratio), -0.02 to 1.40 (OV<sub>100%</sub>), -0.10 to 1.75 (OV<sub>20%</sub>), -0.14 to 1.80 (OV<sub>9%</sub>) and -1.46 to 0.18 (OSI).CONCLUSIONMeasurements provided by OQAS with either method showed a good repeatability. However, the results obtained from the two different measurement methods showed a poor reproducibility. These findings suggest that it might be best to evaluate patients' optical quality by OQAS using the best focus as chosen automatically by the instrument.
基金Spanish Ministry of Education and Science(No.DPI2008-06455-C02-01)European Union and the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation(AECI)(No.D/030286/10)
文摘AIM:To evaluate the accuracy of spherical equivalent(SE) estimates of a double-pass system and to compare it with retinoscopy,subjective refraction and a table mounted autorefractor.METHODS:Non-cycloplegic refraction was performed on 125 eyes of 65 healthy adults(age 23.5±3.0 years) from October 2010 to January 2011 using retinoscopy,subjective refraction,autorefraction(Auto kerato refractometer TOPCON KR-8100,Japan) and a double pass system(Optical Quality Analysis System,OQAS,Visiometrics S.L.,Spain).Nine consecutive measurements with the double-pass system were performed on a subgroup of 22 eyes to assess repeatability.To evaluate the trueness of the OQAS instrument,the SE laboratory bias between the double pass system and the other techniques was calculated.RESULTS:The SE mean coefficient of repeatability obtained was 0.22D.Significant correlations could be established between the OQAS and the SE obtained with retinoscopy(r=0.956,P【0.001),subjective refraction(r=0.955,P【0.001) and autorefraction(r=0.957,P【0.001).The differences in SE between the double-pass system and the other techniques were significant(P【0.001),but lacked clinical relevance except for retinoscopy;Retinoscopy gave more hyperopic values than the double-pass system-0.51±0.50D as well as the subjective refraction-0.23±0.50D;More myopic values were achieved by means of autorefraction 0.24±0.49D. CONCLUSION:The double-pass system provides accurate and reliable estimates of the SE that can be used for clinical studies.This technique can determine the correct focus position to assess the ocular optical quality.However,it has a relatively small measuring range in comparison with autorefractors(-8.00 to +5.00D),and requires prior information on the refractive state of the patient.
基金Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(6143101861201404+1 种基金61461040)the Special Project of Inner Mongolia Key Science&Technology
