Clinical Ophthalmology (Nov 2023)
Measurement Accuracy When Using Spot Vision Screener With or Without Cycloplegia in Young Adults
Abstract
Shunya Tatara,1,2 Fumiatsu Maeda,1,3 Hokuto Ubukata,1 Yuko Shiga,1 Kiyoshi Yaoeda3– 5 1Department of Orthoptics and Visual Sciences, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan; 2Department of Vision Science, Faculty of Sensory and Motor Control, Kitasato University Graduate School of Medical Science, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan; 3Field of Orthoptics and Visual Sciences, Major in Medical and Rehabilitation Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare Graduate School, Niigata, Japan; 4Department of Ophthalmology, Yaoeda Eye Clinic, Nagaoka, Niigata, Japan; 5Division of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, JapanCorrespondence: Shunya Tatara, Department of Orthoptics and Visual Sciences, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398, Shimami-cho, kita-ku, Niigata-shi, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan, Tel/Fax +81 25 257 4752, Email [email protected]: There are many unclear points about the accuracy of measurement of cycloplegic refraction using the Spot Vision Screener (SVS). This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of SVS measurements with cycloplegia for myopia.Materials and Methods: Forty-nine healthy subjects were included, and refraction was measured. Objective refractions were measured by SVS, table-mounted autorefractometer (RT7000), and handheld autorefractometer (Retinomax Screeen) at noncycloplegic and cycloplegic conditions by 1% cyclopentolate. Subjective noncycloplegic refraction was obtained by a visual acuity and refraction test performed by certified orthoptists using a cross-cylinder. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine whether the measured refractions fluctuate due to different reflection tests.Results: In the noncycloplegic condition, the mean (±standard deviation) spherical equivalent (SE) measured by subjective method, SVS, RT7000, and Retinomax Screeen were − 2.56 ± 3.00, − 2.62 ± 2.38, − 3.05 ± 2.84, and − 3.26 ± 2.97, respectively. The subjective SE and objective SE measured by SVS had significantly less myopic value than the objective SE measured by two autorefractometers (p < 0.001). In the cycloplegic condition, the mean (± standard deviation) SE measured by SVS, RT7000, and Retinomax Screeen were − 2.07 ± 2.66, − 2.62 ± 2.98, and − 2.66 ± 3.02, respectively. The objective SE measured by SVS had significantly less myopic value than SEs measured using other methods (p < 0.001). In the cycloplegic condition, SVS showed a fixed error wherein the SE was more hyperopic than that with the subjective method and SVS had a proportional error.Conclusion: In the measurement under cycloplegic conditions, use of an autorefractometer rather than a photorefractometer such as SVS was preferable.Keywords: refraction, refractive error, autorefractometer, photorefraction, screening, amblyopia risk factor
