Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was

Wavefront analyzers induce instrument myopia

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of three wavefront analyzers versus a validated binocular open-view autorefractor in determining refractive error in non-cycloplegic eyes. METHODS: Eighty eyes were examined using the SRW-5000 open-view infrared autorefractor and, in randomized sequence, three wavefront analyzers: 1) OPD-Scan (NIDEK, Gamagori, Japan), 2) WASCA (Zeiss/Meditec, Jena, Germany), and 3) Allegretto (WaveLight Laser Technologies AG, Erlangen, Germany). Subjects were healthy adults (19 men and 21 women; mean age: 20.8 +/- 2.5 years). Refractive errors ranged from +1.5 to -9.75 diopters (D) (mean: +1.83 +/- 2.74 D) with up to 1.75 D cylinder (mean: 0.58 +/- 0.53 D). Three readings were collected per instrument by one examiner without anticholinergic agents. Refraction values were decomposed into vector components for analysis, resulting in mean spherical equivalent refraction (M) and J0 and J45 being vectors of cylindrical power at 0 degrees and 45 degrees, respectively. RESULTS: Positive correlation was observed between wavefront analyzers and the SRW-5000 for spherical equivalent refraction (OPD-Scan, r=0.959, P<.001; WASCA, r=0.981, P<.001; Allegretto, r=0.942, P<.001). Mean differences and limits of agreement showed more negative spherical equivalent refraction with wavefront analyzers (OPD-Scan, 0.406 +/- 0.768 D [range: 0.235 to 0.580 D] [P<.001]; WASCA, 0.511 +/- 0.550 D [range: 0.390 to 0.634 D] [P<.001]; and Allegretto, 0.434 +/- 0.904 D [range: 0.233 to 0.635 D] [P<.001]). A second analysis eliminating outliers showed the same trend but lower differences: OPD-Scan (n=75), 0.24 +/- 0.41 D (range: 0.15 to 0.34 D) (P<.001); WASCA (n=78), 0.46 +/- 0.47 D (range: 0.36 to 0.57 D) (P<.001); and Allegretto (n=77), 0.30 +/- 0.62 D (range: 0.16 to 0.44 D) (P<.001). No statistically significant differences were noted for J0 and J45. CONCLUSIONS: Wavefront analyzer refraction resulted in 0.30 D more myopia compared to SRW-5000 refraction in eyes without cycloplegia. This is the result of the accommodation excess attributable to instrument myopia. For the relatively low degrees of astigmatism in this study (<2.0 D), good agreement was noted between wavefront analyzers and the SRW-5000. Copyright (C) 2006 SLACK Incorporated

Design and validity of a miniaturized open-field aberrometer

PURPOSE: To validate a new miniaturised, open-field wavefront device which has been developed with the capacity to be attached to an ophthalmic surgical microscope or slit-lamp. SETTING: Solihull Hospital and Aston University, Birmingham, UK DESIGN: Comparative non-interventional study. METHODS: The dynamic range of the Aston Aberrometer was assessed using a calibrated model eye. The validity of the Aston Aberrometer was compared to a conventional desk mounted Shack-Hartmann aberrometer (Topcon KR1W) by measuring the refractive error and higher order aberrations of 75 dilated eyes with both instruments in random order. The Aston Aberrometer measurements were repeated five times to assess intra-session repeatability. Data was converted to vector form for analysis. RESULTS: The Aston Aberrometer had a large dynamic range of at least +21.0 D to -25.0 D. It gave similar measurements to a conventional aberrometer for mean spherical equivalent (mean difference ± 95% confidence interval: 0.02 ± 0.49D; correlation: r=0.995, p<0.001), astigmatic components (J0: 0.02 ± 0.15D; r=0.977, p<0.001; J45: 0.03 ± 0.28; r=0.666, p<0.001) and higher order aberrations RMS (0.02 ± 0.20D; r=0.620, p<0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient assessments of intra-sessional repeatability for the Aston Aberrometer were excellent (spherical equivalent =1.000, p<0.001; astigmatic components J0 =0.998, p<0.001, J45=0.980, p<0.01; higher order aberrations RMS =0.961, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Aston Aberrometer gives valid and repeatable measures of refractive error and higher order aberrations over a large range. As it is able to measure continuously, it can provide direct feedback to surgeons during intraocular lens implantations and corneal surgery as to the optical status of the visual system.

Evaluation of the auto-refraction function of the Nidek OPD-Scan III

Background: The aim was to evaluate the validity and repeatability of the auto-refraction function of the Nidek OPD-Scan III (Nidek Technologies, Gamagori, Japan) compared with non-cycloplegic subjective refraction. The Nidek OPD-Scan III is a new aberrometer/corneal topographer workstation based on the skiascopy principle. It combines a wavefront aberrometer, topographer, autorefractor, auto keratometer and pupillometer/pupillographer. Methods: Objective refraction results obtained using the Nidek OPD-Scan III were compared with non-cycloplegic subjective refraction for 108 eyes of 54 participants (29 female) with a mean age of 23.7±9.5 years. Intra-session and inter-session variability were assessed on 14 subjects (28 eyes). Results: The Nidek OPD-Scan III gave slightly more negative readings than results obtained by subjective refraction (Nidek mean difference -0.19±0.36 DS, p<0.01 for sphere; -0.19±0.35 DS, p<0.01 for mean spherical equivalent; -0.002±0.23 DC, p=0.91 for cylinder; -0.06±0.38 DC, p=0.30 for J0 and -0.36±0.31 DC for J45, p=0.29). Auto-refractor results for 74 per cent of spherical readings and 60 per cent of cylindrical powers were within±0.25 of subjective refraction. There was high intra-session and inter-session repeatability for all parameters; 90 per cent of inter-session repeatability results were within 0.25 D. Conclusion: The Nidek OPD-Scan III gives valid and repeatable measures of objective refraction when compared with non-cycloplegic subjective refraction. © 2013 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Optometry © 2013 Optometrists Association Australia.

The influence on unaided vision of age, pupil diameter and spherocylindrical refractive error

Background - The aim was to derive equations for the relationship between unaided vision and age, pupil diameter, iris colour and sphero-cylindrical refractive error. Methods - Data were collected from 663 healthy right eyes of white subjects aged 20 to 70 years. Subjective sphero-cylindrical refractive errors ranged from -6.8 to +9.4 D (mean spherical equivalent), -1.5 to +1.9 D (orthogonal component, J0) and -0.8 to 1.0 D (oblique component, J45). Cylinder axis orientation was orthogonal in 46 per cent of the eyes and oblique in 18 per cent. Unaided vision (-0.3 to +1.3 logMAR), pupil diameter (2.3 to 7.5 mm) and iris colour (67 per cent light/blue irides) was recorded. The sample included mostly females (60 per cent) and many contact lens wearers (42 per cent) and so the influences of these parameters were also investigated. Results - Decision tree analysis showed that sex, iris colour, contact lens wear and cylinder axis orientation did not influence the relationship between unaided vision and refractive error. New equations for the dependence of the minimum angle of resolution on age and pupil diameter arose from step backwards multiple linear regressions carried out separately on the myopes (2.91.scalar vector +0.51.pupil diameter -3.14 ) and hyperopes (1.55.scalar vector + 0.06.age – 3.45 ). Conclusion - The new equations may be useful in simulators designed for teaching purposes as they accounted for 81 per cent (for myopes) and 53 per cent (for hyperopes) of the variance in measured data. In comparison, previously published equations accounted for not more than 76 per cent (for myopes) and 24 per cent (for hyperopes) of the variance depending on whether they included pupil size. The new equations are, as far as is known to the authors, the first to include age. The age-related decline in accommodation is reflected in the equation for hyperopes.

Short-term stability in refractive status despite large fluctuations in glucose levels in diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2

Purpose: This work investigates how short-term changes in blood glucose concentration affect the refractive components of the diabetic eye in patients with long-term Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. Methods: Blood glucose concentration, refractive error components (mean spherical equivalent MSE, J0, J45), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), crystalline lens thickness (LT), axial length (AL) and ocular aberrations were monitored at two-hourly intervals over a 12-hour period in: 20 T1DM patients (mean age ± SD) 38±14 years, baseline HbA1c 8.6±1.9%; 21 T2DM patients (mean age ± SD) 56±11 years, HbA1c 7.5±1.8%; and in 20 control subjects (mean age ± SD) 49±23 years, HbA1c 5.5±0.5%. The refractive and biometric results were compared with the corresponding changes in blood glucose concentration. Results: Blood glucose concentration at different times was found to vary significantly within (p<0.0005) and between groups (p<0.0005). However, the refractive error components and ocular aberrations were not found to alter significantly over the day in either the diabetic patients or the control subjects (p>0.05). Minor changes of marginal statistical or optical significance were observed in some biometric parameters. Similarly there were some marginally significant differences between the baseline biometric parameters of well-controlled and poorly-controlled diabetic subjects. Conclusion: This work suggests that normal, short-term fluctuations (of up to about 6 mM/l on a timescale of a few hours) in the blood glucose levels of diabetics are not usually associated with acute changes in refractive error or ocular wavefront aberrations. It is therefore possible that factors other than refractive error fluctuations are sometimes responsible for the transient visual problems often reported by diabetic patients. © 2012 Huntjens et al.

Validity of a prototype surgical aberrometer

Poster Purpose: A study to validate a prototype Hartmann-Shack (HS) wavefront aberrometer. Methods: The dynamic range was assessed using a calibrated model eye. It was validated against a conventional HS-aberrometer (Topcon KR1W) in 75 eyes using both instruments in random order. Additionally, intra-sessional repeatability was tested. Results: The aberrometer showed a large dynamic range of +21.0 D to −25.0 D. It was comparable to a conventional HS aberrometer for spherical-equivalent SE (MD ± 95% CI: 0.02 ± 0.49D; correlation: r = 0.995, p < 0.001), astigmatic components (J0: 0.02 ± 0.15D; r = 0.977, p < 0.001; J45: 0.03 ± 0.28; r = 0.666, p < 0.001) and HOAs RMS (0.02 ± 0.20D; r = 0.620, p < 0.001). Intra-sessional repeatability correlation was also excellent (SE = 1.000, p < 0.001; astigmatic-components J0 = 0.998, p < 0.001, J45 = 0.980, p < 0.01; HOAs RMS = 0.961, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study confirms the validity of the prototype aberrometer. The prototype aberrometer can measure continuously to provide direct feedback of the optical status of the eye during surgery.