Spot双目视力筛查仪和自动电脑验光仪在近视筛查中结果的比较

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20191024-00288

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (17)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1041 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) Supporting Info

Guide

Abstract Objective: To assess the difference, agreement and relevance for the results of the Spot photoscreener (Welch Allyn, VS100) and auto refractometer (Topcon, KR8800) in detecting myopia in students from a school in Xuzhou, China. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 500 randomly selected students (500 right eyes) aged from 6 to 19 from a school in Xuzhou were measured in turns by the two autorefractors to obtain their refractive status. 1% tropicamide was used as the cycloplegic refraction drug in 498 students. The spherical equivalences (SE) measured by the two autorefractors were compared by a paired t test. Agreement of spherical equivalents from the two devices was assessed by Bland-Altman plots. Spearman correlation analysis was also used to compare the measurements from the two devices. Results: At last, 498 students included. The difference in SE between the two methods was statistically significant (P<0.001). The SE of the Spot appeared more positive compared to the results of the auto refractometer in myopic students (P<0.001). The SE before and after ciliary muscle paralysis was all highly correlated between the two devices (r>0.8, P<0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed a good agreement between the results of the two devices. Conclusions: The Spot photoscreener can give reliable results with or without cycloplegia.

Key words： myopia Spot photoscreener autorefractometer spherical equivalent vision screening

Received: 24 October 2019

PACS:

Fund: Foundation of Science and Technology Program of Xuzhou (KC19203)

Corresponding Authors: Xiaojuan Wang, Department of Ophthalmology, the Affiliated Xuzhou Municipal Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou 221116, China (Email: wangxiaojuan197409@163.com)

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20191024-00288 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2021/V23/I1/54

[1]	Ziemssen F, Lagrèze W, Voykov B. Secondary diseases in high myopia. Ophthalmologe, 2017, 114(1): 30-43. DOI: 10.1007/ s00347-016-0390-x.
[2]	Lai TY, Fan DS, Lai WW, et al. Peripheral and posterior pole retinal lesions in association with high myopia: A cross-sectional community-based study in Hong Kong. Eye (Lond), 2008, 22(2): 209-213. DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702573.
[3]	Jong M, Sankaridurg P, Li W, et al. Reduced vision in highly myopic eyes without ocular pathology: The ZOC-BHVI high myopia study. Clin Exp Optom, 2018, 101(1): 77-83. DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12563.
[4]	瞿佳, 吕帆, 徐良德. 切实做好儿童青少年近视眼防控工作.中华眼科杂志, 2019, 55(2): 81-85. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn. 0412-4081.2019.02.001.
[5]	中华医学会眼科学分会眼视光学组, 中国医师协会眼科医师分会眼视光学专业委员会. 儿童青少年近视普查中检测设备和设置标准化专家共识(2019). 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2019, 21(1): 5-8. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674- 845X.2019.01.002.
[6]	孙丽颖, 丁刚, 李雪, 等. Spot视觉筛查仪在学龄前儿童屈光筛查中的应用. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2016, 18(8): 469-472. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2016.08.005.
[7]	Reddy S, Panda L, Kumar A, et al. Tribal Odisha Eye Disease Study 4: Accuracy and utility of photorefraction for refractive error correction in tribal Odisha (India) school screening.Indian J Ophthalmol, 2018, 66(7): 929-933. DOI: 10.4103/ijo. IJO_74_18.
[8]	Garry GA, Donahue SP. Validation of Spot screening device for amblyopia risk factors. J AAPOS, 2014, 18(5): 476-480. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2014.07.156.
[9]	Ransbarger KM, Dunbar JA, Choi SE, et al. Results of a community vision-screening program using the Spot photoscreener. J AAPOS, 2013, 17(5): 516-520. DOI: 10.1016/ j.jaapos.2013.06.013.
[10]	Kara C, Petricli IS. Comparison of photoscreening and autorefractive screening for the detection of amblyopia risk factors in children under 3 years of age. J AAPOS, 2020, 24(1): 20 e1-20 e8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2019.09.020.
[11]	苏婷, 闵晓珊, 刘双珍, 等. 3种常用验光法在青少年屈光检查中的应用分析. 中南大学学报(医学版), 2016, 41(2): 174-181. DOI: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2016.02.010.
[12]	Yakar K. Corrigendum to "clinical performance of the spot vision photoscreener before and after induction of cycloplegia in children". J Ophthalmol, 2019, 2019: 5329121. DOI: 10.1155/2019/5329121.
[13]	Teberik K, Eski MT, Kaya M, et al. A Comparison of three different photoscreeners in children. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus, 2018, 55(5): 306-311. DOI: 10.3928/01913913- 20180405-03.
[14]	Iuorno JD, Grant WD, Noël LP. Clinical comparison of the Welch Allyn SureSight handheld autorefractor versus cycloplegic autorefraction and retinoscopic refraction. J AAPOS, 2004, 8(2): 123-127. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2003.10.006.
[15]	Choong YF, Chen AH, Goh PP. A comparison of autorefraction and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia in primary school children. Am J Ophthalmol, 2006, 142(1): 68- 74. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.01.084.
[16]	Ma Y, He X, Zou H, et al. Myopia screening: Combining visual acuity and noncycloplegic autorefraction. Optom Vis Sci, 2013, 90(12): 1479-1485. DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000095.
[17]	Yu H, Shao Y, Yuan H, et al. Age-determined referral criteria of myopia for large-scale vision screening. Eye Sci, 2015, 30(4): 151-155. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.1000-4432.2015.11.03.

[1]	. [J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2023, 25(8): 0-.