Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 3, 2026

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
Comparison of biometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image-Guided System versus the auto-refracto-keratometer
Cecilio Velasco-Barona1, Guadalupe Cervantes-Coste1, Erick Mendoza-Schuster1
1Anterior Segment Surgery Department, Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México, 04030, Mexico City, Mexico.
Purpose:
To compare the biometric measurements obtained from the Verion Image-Guided System to those obtained by auto-refracto-keratometer in normal eyes.
Methods:
This is a prospective, observational, comparative study conducted at the Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México I.A.P., Mexico. Three sets of keratometry measurements were obtained using the image-guided system to assess the coefficient of variation, the within-subject standard deviation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A paired Student t test was used to assess statistical significance between the Verion and the auto-refracto-keratometer. A Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was obtained for all measurements, and the level of agreement was verified using Bland-Altman plots.
Results:
The right eyes of 73 patients were evaluated by each platform. The Verion coefficient of variation was 0.3% for the flat and steep keratometry, with the ICC being greater than 0.9 for all parameters measured. Paired t test showed statistically significant differences between groups (P = 0.0001). A good correlation was evidenced for keratometry values between platforms (r = 0.903, P = 0.0001 for K1, and r = 0.890, P = 0.0001). Bland-Altman plots showed a wide data spread for all variables.
Conclusion:
The image-guided system provided highly repeatable corneal power and keratometry measurements. However, significant differences were evidenced between the two platforms, and although values were highly correlated, they showed a wide data spread for all analysed variables; therefore, their interchangeable use for biometry assessment is not advisable.

