Comparing Close-Field and Open-Field Autorefractometry and Subjective Refraction.

Area of Science:

• Ophthalmology
• Optometry
• Pediatric Eye Care

Background:

• Autorefractometers are clinical tools, but their accuracy, especially in pediatric populations, is debated.
• Objective refraction measurements can vary between different autorefractometer types and subjective assessments.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare refractive data obtained from open-field and close-field autorefractometers against subjective refraction without cycloplegia.
• To evaluate the accuracy of autorefractometry in pediatric patients.

Main Methods:

• Fifty pediatric participants' eyes were evaluated using NVision-K 5001 (open-field) and Visionix VX120 (close-field) autorefractometers.
• Subjective refraction was performed using the fogging technique.
• Statistical analysis (Friedman and Wilcoxon tests) compared sphere, spherical equivalent, and J0/J45 vectors.

Main Results:

• Significant differences in sphere measurements were found across all three procedures.
• The close-field Visionix VX120 showed significant differences in spherical equivalent compared to the other two methods.
• No significant differences were observed for J0 and J45 vectors among the procedures.

Conclusions:

• Discrepancies exist between autorefractometers and subjective refraction, with close-field devices showing more variation, potentially due to accommodation.
• Autorefractometry provides valuable preliminary data for visual screening and clinical guidance in pediatric eye care.