Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 5, 2026
Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
Comparing low-cost handheld autorefractors: A practical approach to measuring refraction in low-resource settings
Arunika Agarwal1, David E Bloom1, Vincent P deLuise2
1Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States of America.
Purpose:
To compare and validate the accuracy and ease of use of handheld autorefractors against retinoscopic refraction by an ophthalmologist for assessing the visual acuity of older adults in India.
Methods:
190 patients were enrolled at the Sankara Eye Hospital in Bangalore, India, to undergo refraction using three different handheld devices-Retinomax (Nikon Inc., Japan), Netra (Eyenetra, Inc., USA), and QuickSee (PlenOptika, Inc., USA)-and the results were compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy and refraction done by an ophthalmologist. We analyzed the mean, standard deviation (S.D.), and Bland-Altman comparison of dioptric (D) power accuracy.
Results:
The difference between the handheld devices and subjective refraction for each device was: Retinomax (N = 186), mean -0.41 D, S.D. 2.14; Netra (N = 179), mean 0.61 D, S.D. 2.20; and QuickSee (N = 182), mean -0.05 D, S.D. 1.04.
Conclusion:
The QuickSee and the Retinomax may be used successfully as refraction screening tools in epidemiologic studies of adults in India and as diagnostic tools in low-resource settings.
