Maciej Perdziak , Krystian Prymula , Anna Przekoracka–Krawczyk
{"title":"Utility of retinoscopy to examine peripheral refraction","authors":"Maciej Perdziak , Krystian Prymula , Anna Przekoracka–Krawczyk","doi":"10.1016/j.optom.2023.100505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>This study explored whether retinoscopy (RET) provides comparable results of relative peripheral refraction (RPR) to open–field autorefractometry (AR) in myopic subjects.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Peripheral refraction was measured in 20 myopic and 20 control adult subjects. Both central and peripheral refraction (20° nasal and temporal eccentricity) were measured using RET and open-field AR. Differences in the median central spherical equivalent (SE), median RPR, and median J45/J180 power vectors between the RET and AR techniques were analyzed. Moreover, Bland – Altman plots were used to assess the agreement between RET and AR methods for RPR measurements in MG.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For MG, the median RPR values were positive (hyperopic shift), and no significant differences were observed between the RET and AR techniques with respect to RPR measurement. In addition, we did not observe any significant differences in the RPR values between the nasal and temporal eccentricities for either the RET or AR technique for myopic subjects. There was also a significant correlation and agreement between the RET and AR technique for RPR measurements. With respect to central refraction, the median SE was slightly more positive for the RET than for the AR technique. Inside the CG, we also found significant correlation between the RET and AR technique for RPR measurements, and we observed a myopic shift in peripheral eccentricities.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our results show that retinoscopy may be a useful tool for objective measurements of RPR in myopic subjects and may be used interchangeably with the open-field AR method in everyday clinical practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Optometry","volume":"17 3","pages":"Article 100505"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429623000535/pdfft?md5=135f1ccf63fe1596af567bccae5c2c3d&pid=1-s2.0-S1888429623000535-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Optometry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429623000535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
This study explored whether retinoscopy (RET) provides comparable results of relative peripheral refraction (RPR) to open–field autorefractometry (AR) in myopic subjects.
Methods
Peripheral refraction was measured in 20 myopic and 20 control adult subjects. Both central and peripheral refraction (20° nasal and temporal eccentricity) were measured using RET and open-field AR. Differences in the median central spherical equivalent (SE), median RPR, and median J45/J180 power vectors between the RET and AR techniques were analyzed. Moreover, Bland – Altman plots were used to assess the agreement between RET and AR methods for RPR measurements in MG.
Results
For MG, the median RPR values were positive (hyperopic shift), and no significant differences were observed between the RET and AR techniques with respect to RPR measurement. In addition, we did not observe any significant differences in the RPR values between the nasal and temporal eccentricities for either the RET or AR technique for myopic subjects. There was also a significant correlation and agreement between the RET and AR technique for RPR measurements. With respect to central refraction, the median SE was slightly more positive for the RET than for the AR technique. Inside the CG, we also found significant correlation between the RET and AR technique for RPR measurements, and we observed a myopic shift in peripheral eccentricities.
Conclusion
Our results show that retinoscopy may be a useful tool for objective measurements of RPR in myopic subjects and may be used interchangeably with the open-field AR method in everyday clinical practice.
目的:本研究探讨了在近视受试者中,视网膜镜(RET)是否能提供与开视野自动折射仪(AR)相当的相对周边屈光度(RPR)结果:对 20 名近视成年受试者和 20 名对照成年受试者进行了周边屈光度测量。使用 RET 和开视野自动屈光仪测量中心和周边屈光度(20° 鼻偏心和颞偏心)。分析了 RET 和 AR 技术的中心球面等效中值 (SE)、RPR 中值和 J45/J180 功率矢量中值的差异。此外,还使用 Bland - Altman 图评估了 RET 和 AR 方法在测量 MG RPR 时的一致性:对于 MG,RPR 中位值为正值(远视偏移),RET 和 AR 技术在 RPR 测量方面没有发现明显差异。此外,无论是 RET 还是 AR 技术,我们都没有观察到近视受试者鼻偏心和颞偏心的 RPR 值有明显差异。在 RPR 测量方面,RET 和 AR 技术之间也存在明显的相关性和一致性。在中心屈光度方面,RET 技术的 SE 中值比 AR 技术的 SE 中值更正。在中心视网膜内部,我们还发现 RET 和 AR 技术的 RPR 测量结果之间存在显著的相关性,而且我们观察到周边偏心率出现了近视偏移:我们的研究结果表明,视网膜镜可能是客观测量近视受试者RPR的有用工具,在日常临床实践中可与开视野AR法交替使用。