Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 10, 2026

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
Clinical Evaluation of an Affordable Handheld Wavefront Autorefractor in an Adult Population in a Low-Resource
David Tayah1, Ricardo Noguera Louzada2,3, Pedro Lucas Machado Magalhães4
1Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus 69080-900, AM, Brazil.
Abstract:
This study evaluates the ability of the QuickSee Free (QSF) portable autorefractor (PlenOptika) to detect and measure refractive error compared to subjective clinical refractometry (SCR) in a Brazilian adult population in a low-resource setting in Amazonas. A total of 100 participants aged 18-65 years underwent visual acuity screening and autorefraction with and without cycloplegia using the QSF, alongside a complete ophthalmic examination including SCR. Refractive error measurements included spherical component (SC), cylindrical component (CC), cylindrical axis (CA), spherical equivalent (SE), and vector powers (MV90 and MV135). Accuracy was assessed for hyperopia ≥ +2.00 D, myopia ≤ -0.75 D, astigmatism ≥ 1.00 DC, and anisometropia ≥ 1.00 D using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The area under the curve for detecting significant refractive errors ranged from 0.538 to 0.930. The mean difference between QSF without cycloplegia and SCR was -1.08 ± 1.17 D for SC and -1.15 ± 1.15 D for SE (p < 0.0001), and with cycloplegia, it was -0.81 ± 1.07 D and -0.83 ± 1.02 D, respectively. The QSF exhibited a moderate negative bias for both SC and SE with and without cycloplegia, underestimating these values, but it showed good predictability for detecting refractive errors in a low-resource setting.

