Accuracy of Plusoptix SO4 in children and teens

Ayse, Yilmaz Kiyak; Üretmen, Önder; Köse, Süheyla

doi:10.3129/i10-110

Cited by 24 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cycloplegic retinoscopy reveals significantly more hyperopia than is found under non-cycloplegic conditions, in line with previous studies using pre-and post-cycloplegic autorefraction, both in children and adults, 1,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] with the mean difference reported by the present study (0.59 AE 0.51DS) similar to autorefraction values. 18,25 As found using autorefraction, the largest differences were demonstrated in the present study's youngest participants (6)(7) year-olds), with differences reducing significantly as age increased up to 12-13 years.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of retinoscopy results with and without 1% cyclopentolate in school‐aged children

Doherty

Doyle

McCullough

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study was designed with the aim of providing practitioners with an evidence base to inform their clinical decision making as to when cycloplegic retinoscopy is necessary and when it might be appropriate to forgo. The study aimed to determine the age at which there ceases to be a clinically significant difference between cycloplegic and non‐cycloplegic retinoscopy and whether age, refractive error, habitual spectacle wear and accommodation influence the relationship. Methods A single examiner carried out cycloplegic and non‐cycloplegic retinoscopy on 128 children stratified into four age groups (6–7, 8–9, 10–12 and 12–13 years). Cycloplegia was achieved using 1% cyclopentolate and retinoscopy carried out after 30 min. The examiner was masked to the lenses used and to habitual spectacle wear. Accommodation was assessed using dynamic retinoscopy prior to cycloplegia. Results Cycloplegic and non‐cycloplegic sphere differed significantly (z = −9.18, p < 0.0001). Although the difference decreased significantly as age increased (χ2 = 16.57, p = 0.0009), cycloplegic retinoscopy revealed more hyperopia than non‐cycloplegic retinoscopy in all age groups (p < 0.0001). The difference between cycloplegic and non‐cycloplegic results was greater where ‘high’ hyperopia (≥+2.50DS) was present (F1,6 = 12.86, p = 0.0005), and as hyperopia increased the difference increased (Spearman's ρ = 0.55, p < 0.0001). Neither spectacle wear (p = 0.74) nor accommodation (p = 0.08) influenced the difference between spherical measures. Measures of astigmatic error did not differ significantly (z = −1.59, p = 0.11). A non‐cycloplegic sphere ≥+1.50DS was relatively sensitive (87%) and specific (96%) at indicating clinically significant hyperopia (≥+2.50D) as revealed by cycloplegic retinoscopy. Conclusions Cyclopentolate 1% does not impact the cylindrical component of the retinoscopy result, but reveals significantly more hyperopia in the spherical component, both statistically and clinically in children aged 6–13 years. Differences between cycloplegic and non‐cycloplegic sphere increase significantly with increasing hyperopia, independent of spectacle wear and accommodation. A non‐cycloplegic retinoscopy result of ≥+1.50DS may be used by practitioners wishing to identify children aged 6–13 years at risk of clinically significant hyperopia (≥+2.50DS), but cycloplegia is required to accurately ascertain the full spherical error.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of retinoscopy results with and without 1% cyclopentolate in school‐aged children

Doherty

Doyle

McCullough

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Photorefraction is one such example. It has been a common technique for assessing refraction in both infants and children for decades; however, the results have been equivocal, when compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy . There is also evidence suggesting that non‐cycloplegic autorefraction has reasonable accuracy and repeatablity when compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy and cycloplegic subjective refraction For example, a recent study compared three autorefractors, the Retinomax K‐plus 2 (Nikon Corp, Japan), Canon RK10 Autorefractor (Canon, Japan) and Grand Seiko WR‐5100K (Shin‐Nippon, Japan) to conventional subjective refraction, both with and without cycloplegia, in children.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of objective refraction in darkness to cycloplegic refraction: a pilot study

Vasudevan

Ciuffreda

Meehan

et al. 2016

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, Satiani and Mutti applied accessory +4.50 D spectacles to extend the operating range of the PowerRefractor to detect highly hyperopic refractive errors and Nathan and Donohue modified Plusoptix referral criteria to enhance specificity of the device, whereas the original claim of the manufacturers about efficacy of photorefractors to determine the refractive errors in a defined range is still controversial. For instance, Matta and colleagues suggested that the Plusoptix S04 photoscreener is a very useful tool and vision screening programs likely will find this a useful option when examining children, while Ayse, Onder and Suheyla reported that Plusoptix S04 is not an accurate tool to estimate refraction in children.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of the Plusoptix S08 photorefractor to retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy

Mirzajani

Heirani

Jafarzadehpur

et al. 2013

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The aim was to compare outcome measures of refractive error by the Plusoptix S08 photorefractor with measures obtained by retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy in children. Method: The refractive error of the right eye of 144 non-strabismic children, aged 2.5 to 5.5 years, was determined by Plusoptix S08 photorefraction, retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy. Agreement between outcome measures of refractive error (spherical error, cylindrical error and spherical equivalent) by the three techniques were tested by Bland-Altman limits of agreement. Conclusion:As the findings demonstrate a fairly good consistency between the results of the Plusoptix S08 Photorefractor without using cycloplegic agents and those of cycloretinoscopy, the Plusoptix S08 is a fairly accurate tool to estimate refractive errors of children in the limited working range of the instrument.

show abstract

Accuracy of Plusoptix SO4 in children and teens

Cited by 24 publications

References 25 publications

Comparison of retinoscopy results with and without 1% cyclopentolate in school‐aged children

Comparison of retinoscopy results with and without 1% cyclopentolate in school‐aged children

Comparison of objective refraction in darkness to cycloplegic refraction: a pilot study

A comparison of the Plusoptix S08 photorefractor to retinoscopy and cycloretinoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About