Abstract
Purpose: To compare spectrum of autorefraction and retinoscopy with subjective acceptance between rural and urban school going children.
Materials and Methods: A total of 100 Children between 6-16 years of age were included in this study (50 rural 50 urban). Findings of autorefraction and retinoscopy with subjective acceptance were calculated and compared between the two groups.
Results: Out of 100 children 22% were in the age group of 6-8 years, 30% in the age group of 9-11 years with a frequency of 30% and 34% in the age group of 12-14 years and 14% of ≥15 years. The mean age was 11.2 years. Dry autorefractometer over corrects refractive error in comparison to subjective acceptance. In our study of wet autorefraction and subjective acceptance myopia has mean of -2.27 with subjective acceptance of 2.03 whereas in hypermetropia has mean of 2.81 with acceptance 2.52 in right eye. In comparison of dry retinoscopy with subjective acceptance myopia of right eye has mean of -0.99 with SD-2.03 and hyperopia of 3.49 with SD 2.52. In comparison of wet retinoscopy with subjective acceptance which shows P value of <0.05 which is clinically insignificant.
Conclusion: We concluded from this study that autorefractometer over estimates refractive errors but there was no significant difference between wet retnoscopy and subjective acceptance. So according to this study we suggest use of cycloplegic retnoscopy with subjective acceptance in determining refractive errors in children.
References
- Abrams D. Duke-Elder’s Practice of Refraction. lOth ed. Philadelphia; Elsevier Science; 2002. p. 45-71.
- Mohan K, Sharma A. Optimal dosage of cyclopentolate 1% for cycloplegic refraction in hypermetropes with brown irides. Indian J. Ophthalmol 2011; 59:514-6.
- Ramanjit S, Tandon R. Parsons’ Diseases of the Eye. India: Elsevier India: 2011.
- Elkington AR, Frank HJ, Greaney MJ. Clinical Optics. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1999
- Murthy GV, Gupta SK, Ellwein LB, Munoz SR, Pokharel GP, SangaL,et al. Refractive error in children in an urban population in New Delhi. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 2002;43:623-31.
- Dandona R, Dandona L, Srinivas M, Sahare P, Narsaiah S, Munoz SR, et al. Refractive error in children in a ruralpopulation in India. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 2002;43:615-22.
- Shneor E, Millodot M, Avraham O, Amar S, Gordon- Shaag A. Clinical evaluation of the L80 auto refractometer. Clin Exp Optom 2012;95:66-71.
- Dahlmann-Noor AH, Comyn O, Kostakis V, Misra A, Gupta N, Heath J, et al. Plusoptix Vision Screener: The accuracy and repeatability of refractive measurements using a new autorefractor. Br J Ophthalmol 2009;93:346-9.
- Funarunart P, Tengtrisom S, Sangsupawanich P, Siangyai P. Accuracy of noncycloplegic refraction in primary school children in Southern Thailand. J Med Assoc Thai 2009;92:806-11.
- Jorge J, Queiros A, Almeida JB, Parafita MA. Retinoscopy/ autorefraction: which is the best starting point for a noncycloplegic refraction? Optom Vis Sei 2005;82:64-8.
- Jorge J, Queiros A, Gonzälez-Meijome J, Femandes P, Almeida JB, Parafita MA. The influence of cycloplegia in objective refraction. Ophthalmie Physiol Opt 2005;25:340-5.
- Mallen EA, Wolffsohn JS, Gilmartin B, Tsujimura S. Clinical evaluation of the Shin Nippon SRW5000 autorefractor in adults. Ophthalmie Physiol Opt. 2001 ;21:101—1.
- TRotsos, Grigoriou D, Kokkolaki A, Manios N. A comparison of manifest refractions, cycloplegic refractions and retinoscopy on the RMA-3000 autorefractometer in children aged 3 to 15 years. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, NZ). 2009;3:42907.
- Pokupec R, Mrazovac D, PopvicSuic S, Mrazovac V, Kordic R, Petricek I. Comparison between refractometer and retinoscopy in determining refractive errors in children. Coll Antropol. 2013 Apr; 37 Suppl 1:2058.
Corresponding Author
Shiraz Ahmad Bhat
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v9i1.46
