Automatic Infrared Refractors—A Comparative Study

Wesemann, W.; Rassow, B.

doi:10.1097/00006324-198708000-00011

Cited by 50 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[1][2][3][4][5] The confidence limits for differences between the autorefractor result and the optometrist's prescription were larger than the values found when comparing subjective refractions by different examiners. [6][7][8] We employed a questionnaire to assess whether this increase in confidence limits resulted in greater spectacle prescription intolerance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3][4][5] Findings indicate that autorefractors provide a reasonable level of accuracy in the measurement of refractive error. However, the variability found when comparing autorefractor and subjective measurements is greater than the variability found when comparing the subjective prescriptions of different optometrists.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To some extent, the solution will depend on the accuracy of autorefractor measurements. As autorefractors [1][2][3][4][5] tend to exhibit wider confidence limits than subjective refraction, [6][7][8] it is likely that the feasibility of prescribing directly from an autorefractor prescription may also depend on the ability of patients to tolerate some inaccuracy in their spectacle prescription.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical evaluation of patient tolerance to autorefractor prescriptions

Strang

Gray

Winn

et al. 1998

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:In clinical optometric practice, autorefractors are used as an objective measure of refractive error prior to subjective refraction. We evaluate the clinical efficacy of autorefractor measurements by determining whether spectacles can be prescribed from autorefractor results. Methods: Forty-seven subjects were randomly allocated spectacles using prescriptions determined either by an optometrist or from an autorefractor in a double-blind protocol. Subjects wore each prescription for two weeks and completed an oral questionnaire following each period of wear. The questionnaire assessed both pairs of spectacle lenses in terms of visual performance and ocular comfort. Results: The level of negative responses to all questions was higher for spectacles based on the autorefractor findings than for those based on the optometrist's prescriptions. Having reported initial discomfort, many subjects indicated that they had adapted to the spectacle lenses over a two-week period. Conclusions: Our results suggest that, in a clinical environment, subjective refraction produces a more accurate and acceptable spectacle prescription than an autorefractor.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical evaluation of patient tolerance to autorefractor prescriptions

Strang

Gray

Winn

et al. 1998

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Variações de ± 0,25DC e de ± 0,50DC ocorreram em 77,7% e 92,8%, respectivamente, em concordância com a literatura [5][6][7][8][9] .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Quando a análise foi feita para cada uma das ametropias cilíndricas, foi no astigmatismo misto que ocorreu a maior porcentagem (45,0%) de concordância do eixo do cilindro. O maior acerto da RAO na determinação do eixo do cilindro no astigmatismo misto já foi descrito anteriormente 4 , sendo este acerto mais freqüente quanto maior o valor do cilindro 6,[10][11] .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified