Related Experiment Videos
Reliability of refraction--a literature review
1School of Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington 47405, USA.
Journal of the American Optometric Association
|October 1, 1996
Summary
Conventional subjective refraction is reliable for measuring refractive error, with high agreement rates. Autorefractors are useful for preliminary measurements but do not replace the need for subjective refraction.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Optometry
- Vision Science
Background:
- Refractive error measurement reliability is crucial for clinical decisions and research.
- Existing literature addresses the reliability of various refraction methods.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review and synthesize findings on the reliability of conventional subjective refraction and autorefractors.
- To assess the consistency of refractive error measurements.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review of studies on intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability of subjective refraction.
- Review of studies comparing autorefractor results with subjective refraction.
Main Results:
- Subjective refraction demonstrates high reliability: approximately 80% agreement within +/- 0.25D and 95% within +/- 0.50D.
- Autorefractor reliability is comparable to subjective refraction.
- Conventional subjective refraction is reliable within 0.25 to 0.50D.
Conclusions:
- Conventional subjective refraction is a reliable method for determining refractive error.
- Autorefractors serve as effective preliminary tools but are not replacements for subjective refraction.