Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2025
Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
Interdevice agreement in the measurement of physiognomy parameters and frame angles to prescribe progressive addition
Oscar Garcia-Espinilla1, Ines Gallegos-Cocho1, Irene Sanchez1
1Optometry Research Group, IOBA Eye Institute, Departamento de Física Teórica, Atómica y Óptica, Universidad de Valladolid, Campus Miguel Delibes, Valladolid, Spain.
Clinical Relevance:
Ophthalmic lens adaptation requires accurate measurements of physiognomy parameters and frame angles, with a great impact on subject vision, especially when personalised progressive addition lenses are prescribed.
Background:
The aim of this study is to describe interdevice agreement between different methods and traditional methods (frame ruler).
Methods:
The agreement of the interpupillary distance, nasopupillary distance and fitting point height measured with four devices (PD-5, OptiCenter, Visioffice and a frame ruler) and of pantoscopic and frame wrap angles measured with three devices (OptiCenter, Visioffice and Essilor standard ruler) was assessed in 21 healthy volunteers, by a Bland-Altman analysis; mean difference and limits of agreement (LoA) were calculated.
Results:
Frame ruler nasopupillary distance measurements showed limited agreement with PD-5 [-0.38 ± 1.03 (LoA -2.40 to 1.64) and 0.44 ± 1.02 (LoA -1.72 to 2.61)] and Visioffice [0.62 ± 1.24 (LoA -1.81 to 3.05) and -0.16 ± 1.72 (LoA -3.54 to 3.22)] measurements for the right and left eyes, respectively. Poor agreement was found for interpupillary distances (PD-5 [0.21 ± 1.47 (LoA -2.67 to 3.09)], OptiCenter [-0.05 ± 1.16 (LoA -2.32 to 2.22)] and Visioffice [0.46 ± 1.95 (LoA -3.36 to 4.28)]), fitting point height (OptiCenter [-1.27 ± 2.56 (LoA -6.27 to 3.75) and -0.92 ± 2.77 (LoA -6.35 to 4.51)] and Visioffice [-5.88 ± 6.21 (LoA -18.05 to 6.29) and -5.98 ± 6.12 (LoA -17.98 to 6.02)] for the right and left eyes, respectively) and pantoscopic and frame wrap angles (OptiCenter [-4.13 ± 3.75 (LoA -11.48 to 3.22) and -1.09 ± 0.60 (LoA -2.27 to 0.09)] and Visioffice [-6.18 ± 3.53 (LoA -13.10 to 0.74) and -1.93 ± 3.49 (LoA -8.77 to 4.91)], respectively).
Conclusions:
These results suggest that measurements of physiognomy and frame angles are not interchangeable between assessed devices and that these differences could induce lens centration errors with a large impact on progressive addition lens prescriptions.
Related Concept Videos
01:16Focusing of Light in the Eye
01:15Depth Perception and Spatial Vision