通过 InnovEyes 平台比较近视患者的主观屈光度和波前测量屈光度。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Yuexin Wang, Ningkai Tang, Zhixin Duan, Yu Zhang, Yifei Yuan, Yan Liu, Shuo Yu, Ziyuan Liu, Yueguo Chen
{"title":"通过 InnovEyes 平台比较近视患者的主观屈光度和波前测量屈光度。","authors":"Yuexin Wang, Ningkai Tang, Zhixin Duan, Yu Zhang, Yifei Yuan, Yan Liu, Shuo Yu, Ziyuan Liu, Yueguo Chen","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20241002-04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the subjective refraction and Innov-Eyes (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) wavefront-measured refraction in patients with myopia and astigmatism before refractive surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive myopic patients planning to receive refractive surgery with ages between 18 and 50 years old were retrospectively enrolled. The subjective and wavefront-measured refraction (InnovEyes platform) were compared, and the influential factors for the measurement difference were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 500 eyes enrolled, the mean age was 29.3 ± 6.8 years. Mean wavefront-measured refraction was 0.58 ± 0.62 diopters (D) more myopic and 0.10 ± 0.27 D more astigmatic than subjective refraction (<i>P</i> < .001). Wavefront-measured refraction exhibited excellent consistency and significant correlation with subjective refraction. Linear regression demonstrated that age (<i>P</i> = .008) and wavefront-measured sphere standard deviation (<i>P</i> < .001) were positively correlated with spherical measurement difference, and total quality score (<i>P</i> < .001) and accommodative response (binocular cross-cylinder) (<i>P</i> = .011) demonstrated a negative correlation with spherical and cylindrical measurement difference. The patients with low wavefront measurement quality had significantly greater spherical differences than those with high-quality measurement (<i>P</i> < .001). The patients with accommodative lead had greater spherical equivalent differences than other participants (<i>P</i> = .047).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wavefront-measured refraction had excellent consistency with subjective refraction, although it measured more myopia and astigmatism than subjective refraction. The spherical measurement difference was greater in older patients and those with accommodative lead. More stable and higher quality repeated measurements will yield closer results between wavefront-measured and subjective refraction. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2024;40(11):e836-e844.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"40 11","pages":"e836-e844"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Subjective and Wavefront-Measured Refractions by InnovEyes Platform in Myopic Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Yuexin Wang, Ningkai Tang, Zhixin Duan, Yu Zhang, Yifei Yuan, Yan Liu, Shuo Yu, Ziyuan Liu, Yueguo Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.3928/1081597X-20241002-04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the subjective refraction and Innov-Eyes (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) wavefront-measured refraction in patients with myopia and astigmatism before refractive surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive myopic patients planning to receive refractive surgery with ages between 18 and 50 years old were retrospectively enrolled. The subjective and wavefront-measured refraction (InnovEyes platform) were compared, and the influential factors for the measurement difference were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 500 eyes enrolled, the mean age was 29.3 ± 6.8 years. Mean wavefront-measured refraction was 0.58 ± 0.62 diopters (D) more myopic and 0.10 ± 0.27 D more astigmatic than subjective refraction (<i>P</i> < .001). Wavefront-measured refraction exhibited excellent consistency and significant correlation with subjective refraction. Linear regression demonstrated that age (<i>P</i> = .008) and wavefront-measured sphere standard deviation (<i>P</i> < .001) were positively correlated with spherical measurement difference, and total quality score (<i>P</i> < .001) and accommodative response (binocular cross-cylinder) (<i>P</i> = .011) demonstrated a negative correlation with spherical and cylindrical measurement difference. The patients with low wavefront measurement quality had significantly greater spherical differences than those with high-quality measurement (<i>P</i> < .001). The patients with accommodative lead had greater spherical equivalent differences than other participants (<i>P</i> = .047).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wavefront-measured refraction had excellent consistency with subjective refraction, although it measured more myopia and astigmatism than subjective refraction. The spherical measurement difference was greater in older patients and those with accommodative lead. More stable and higher quality repeated measurements will yield closer results between wavefront-measured and subjective refraction. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2024;40(11):e836-e844.]</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\"40 11\",\"pages\":\"e836-e844\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of refractive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20241002-04\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20241002-04","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较近视和散光患者在屈光手术前的主观屈光度和Innov-Eyes(Alcon 实验室公司)波前测量屈光度:方法:对计划接受屈光手术的 18 至 50 岁近视患者进行回顾性登记。比较主观屈光度和波前测量屈光度(InnovEyes 平台),并分析测量差异的影响因素:结果:在入选的 500 只眼睛中,平均年龄为(29.3 ± 6.8)岁。波前测量的平均屈光度比主观屈光度近视 0.58 ± 0.62 迪,散光 0.10 ± 0.27 迪(P < .001)。波前测量的屈光度与主观屈光度具有良好的一致性和显著的相关性。线性回归表明,年龄(P = .008)和波前测量的球面标准偏差(P < .001)与球面测量差呈正相关,而总质量评分(P < .001)和适应反应(双眼交叉圆柱)(P = .011)与球面和圆柱测量差呈负相关。波前测量质量低的患者的球差明显大于测量质量高的患者(P < .001)。与其他参与者相比,有容纳引导的患者的球面等效差更大 (P = .047):结论:波前测量屈光度与主观屈光度具有极好的一致性,尽管波前测量屈光度比主观屈光度测量出更多的近视和散光。老年患者和有适应性引导的患者的球面测量差异更大。更稳定、更高质量的重复测量将使波前测量结果与主观屈光度更接近。[J Refract Surg. 2024;40(11):e836-e844]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Subjective and Wavefront-Measured Refractions by InnovEyes Platform in Myopic Patients.

Purpose: To compare the subjective refraction and Innov-Eyes (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) wavefront-measured refraction in patients with myopia and astigmatism before refractive surgery.

Methods: Consecutive myopic patients planning to receive refractive surgery with ages between 18 and 50 years old were retrospectively enrolled. The subjective and wavefront-measured refraction (InnovEyes platform) were compared, and the influential factors for the measurement difference were analyzed.

Results: Of the 500 eyes enrolled, the mean age was 29.3 ± 6.8 years. Mean wavefront-measured refraction was 0.58 ± 0.62 diopters (D) more myopic and 0.10 ± 0.27 D more astigmatic than subjective refraction (P < .001). Wavefront-measured refraction exhibited excellent consistency and significant correlation with subjective refraction. Linear regression demonstrated that age (P = .008) and wavefront-measured sphere standard deviation (P < .001) were positively correlated with spherical measurement difference, and total quality score (P < .001) and accommodative response (binocular cross-cylinder) (P = .011) demonstrated a negative correlation with spherical and cylindrical measurement difference. The patients with low wavefront measurement quality had significantly greater spherical differences than those with high-quality measurement (P < .001). The patients with accommodative lead had greater spherical equivalent differences than other participants (P = .047).

Conclusions: Wavefront-measured refraction had excellent consistency with subjective refraction, although it measured more myopia and astigmatism than subjective refraction. The spherical measurement difference was greater in older patients and those with accommodative lead. More stable and higher quality repeated measurements will yield closer results between wavefront-measured and subjective refraction. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(11):e836-e844.].

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
160
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Refractive Surgery, the official journal of the International Society of Refractive Surgery, a partner of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, has been a monthly peer-reviewed forum for original research, review, and evaluation of refractive and lens-based surgical procedures for more than 30 years. Practical, clinically valuable articles provide readers with the most up-to-date information regarding advances in the field of refractive surgery. Begin to explore the Journal and all of its great benefits such as: • Columns including “Translational Science,” “Surgical Techniques,” and “Biomechanics” • Supplemental videos and materials available for many articles • Access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content • Articles posted online just 2 months after acceptance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信