Correlation between Autorefractometry and Retinoscopy with Subjective Refraction in Refractive Error Patients at Dr Kariadi Hospital, Semarang
Article Sidebar
-
Autorefractometry, retinoscopy, subjective refraction
Abstract
Objective: Refractive errors are a major cause of visual impairment in Indonesia. In Dr. Kariadi Hospital Semarang, it is amongst the top five diagnoses within the ophthalmology department. Therefore, objective refraction is imperative for the management of refractive errors. These examinations include autorefractometry and retinoscopy. Despite the fact that retinoscopy is the gold standard, autorefractometry is more desirable as it is more sophisticated, swift, and convenient. Autorefractometry's results are expected to match results from subjective correction, therefore, reduce examination time as patient visits increase. This study aims to determine the correlation between autorefractometry and retinoscopy examination with subjective refraction.
Methods: The study design was cross-sectional. The study was conducted on 34 eyes with refractive error taken by consecutive sampling. The subjects had to meet inclusion and exclusion criteria. All subjects underwent visual acuity examination, refractive correction by autorefractometry, retinoscopy, and subjective refraction. All data were processed by using computerized formulations.
Results: Based on the demographics there were 61.8% of women and 38.2% of men with an average age of 29.7 + 9. The results of this study showed a strong correlation between autorefractometry and subjective refraction. Furthermore, retinoscopy shows a strong correlation with subjective refraction as well.
Conclusion: This study shows retinoscopy is superior to autorefractometry. However, autorefractometry is a viable replacement for patients in Dr. Kariadi Hospital Semarang.
Full text article
References
Infodatin Pusat data dan informasi kementerian kesehatan RI. Situasi gangguan penglihatan dan kebutaan. 2014. Indonesia
Flaxman SR, Bourne RRA, Resnikoff S, et al. Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990–2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(12):e1221– e1234
TR Fricke, BA Holden, DA Wilson, G Schlenther, KS Naidoo. Global cost of correcting vision impairment from uncorrected refractive error. World Health Organization. 2012. Australia.
Hashemi Hassan, et all. Global and regional estimates of prevalence of refractive errors: Systematic review and meta-analysis. ScienceDirect. 2017. Iran
Rumondor.Nandy, Rares. Laya. Hubungan Kelainan Refraksi dengan Prestasi Belajar Anak di SMP Kristen Eben Haezar 2 Manado. Universitas Samratulangi Manado.
Retinoscopy Handbook for Clinicians. Retinometri manual for practicing clinicians. New England. Orbis. Page 4-14. 2015
Mukash SN, Kayembe DL, Mwanza JC. Agreement between retinoscopy, autorefractometry and subjective refraction for determining refractive errors in Congelese children. Dovepress. Clinical optometri 2021:13 129-136.
Paliyama, M. Perbandingan selisih nilai reflaksi subjektif dengan nilai streak retinoskopi dan autorefractometer tanpa sikloplegik pada anak dan dewasa. ETD UGM. 2009. Yogyakarta.
Salazar, et all. Refractive errors among children, adolescents, and Adultsattending eye clinics in Mexico. In J Ophtlamology.Volume 10. 2017. Mexico.
Elliot , David B. Determination of the refractive correction. Clinical procedure in health eye care. 98-106.
Puspitasari. Serly indah. Perbandingan hasil koreksi pemeriksaan subjektif (Trial and error) dengan pemeriksaan objektif (Streak Retinoskopi) tanpa sikloplegik pada penderita miopia. Repository Universitas Sumatera Utara. 2017. Medan.
Bennet Jeffrey. Comparison of autorefraction to subjective refraction. American Academy of Optometry. 2009. Mayoclinic health system. Florida
Ganger Anita, Saroj Bala, Kaur Inderjit,Kaur Prempa, Satpal. Comparison of Autorefractometer, Retnoscope and Subjective Method in Miopic and Hypermetropic Patients. Internasional Jouenal of Contemporary Medical Research. 2017. Vlolume 4. 740-743.
Asiedu K, Kyei S, Ampiah EE. Autorefraction, retinoscopy, javal’s rule, and Grosvenor’s modified javal’s rule: the bestpredictor of refractive astigmatism. J Ophthalmol. 2016;2016:3584137
Uras R, Belfort R, Hofling-Lima AL, Martins EL. Automatic objective refraction and clinical refraction - a comparative analysis Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2001;64:33-.the general population. Elsevier. 2015. Volume 122. Page 101-109.
Prabhakar SK. Study on accommodation by autorefraction and dynamic refraction in children. J Optom. 2014;7:193– 202.
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.