Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 6, 2026
05:14
Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
526
Accuracy, speed and repeatability of the voice assisted subjective refractor (VASR)
Alan G Kabat1, Christopher W Lievens2, Christina M Newman2
1Pennsylvania College of Optometry, Salus University, Elkins Park, PA, USA.
Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)
|October 2, 2019
Summary
The voice-assisted subjective refractor (VASR) provides accurate refractive error measurements comparable to traditional methods. While slightly slower, VASR demonstrates excellent repeatability for precise vision correction.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology and Optometry
- Vision Science
- Medical Technology
Background:
- Accurate refractive error assessment is crucial for effective vision correction.
- Traditional subjective refraction methods, while established, can be time-consuming and operator-dependent.
- Advancements in technology aim to improve the efficiency and accuracy of refractive procedures.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the accuracy, speed, and repeatability of the voice-assisted subjective refractor (VASR) against traditional subjective phoropter methods.
- To evaluate the clinical utility of VASR in refractive error determination.
Main Methods:
- Fifty healthy adult subjects underwent autorefraction followed by traditional phoropter refinement.
- Subjects were subsequently assessed using the VASR (Vmax Vision) for both objective and subjective results.
- Three assessments per subject were conducted using each method, with corrected visual acuity and total procedure time recorded.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant differences were found between VASR and traditional methods in equivalent sphere, cylinder power, or axis measurements.
- Datasets showed high correlation (r=0.993 for sphere, r=0.864 for cylinder, r=0.738 for axis).
- VASR was on average 71 seconds longer than traditional refraction but demonstrated clinically and statistically significant repeatability, comparable to the phoropter.
Conclusions:
- Refractive error results from VASR are statistically equivalent to those obtained via traditional phoropter methods.
- VASR offers clinically significant repeatability, matching traditional refraction standards.
- While slightly longer in duration, VASR presents a viable, accurate, and repeatable alternative for subjective refraction.
