Reproducibility of sphero-cylindrical prescriptions

Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 143-150

  MacKenzie, Graeme E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dioptric power; Refraction; Refractive error; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASTIGMATISM; EYE REFRACTION; HUMAN; OPTICS; OPTOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFRACTION ERROR; REPRODUCIBILITY; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; ASTIGMATISM; ENGLAND; HUMANS; MALE; OPTOMETRY; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; REFRACTION, OCULAR; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 40749153945     PISSN: 02755408     EISSN: 14751313     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00549.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Altman, D. G. Bland, J. M. (1983) Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 32, 307 317.
2. Bannon, R. E. (1977) A new automated subjective optometer. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 54, 433 438.
3. Benjamin, W. J. (1998) Monocular and binocular subjective refraction. In : Borish's Clinical Refraction, 1st edn (eds I. M. Borish W. J. Benjamin WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 670.
4. Bland, J. M. Altman, D. G. (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet i, 307 310.
5. Bullimore, M. A., Fusaro, R. E. Adams, C. W. (1998) The repeatability of automated and clinical refraction. Optom. Vis. Sci. 75, 617 622.
6. Chat, S. W. S. Edwards, M. H. (2001) Clinical evaluation of the Shin-Nippon SQR-5000 autorefractor in children. Ophthal Physiol. Opt. 21, 87 100.
7. Choong, Y. F., Chen, A. H. Goh, P. P. (2006) A comparison of autorefraction and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia in primary school children. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 142, 68 74.
8. Dave, T. Fukuma, Y. (2004) Clinical evaluation of the Topcon BV-1000 automated subjective refraction system. Optom. Vis. Sci. 81, 323 333.
9. Elliott, M., Simpson, T., Richter, D. Fonn, D. (1997) Repeatability and accuracy of automated refraction: a comparison of the Nikon NRK-8000, the Nidek AR-1000, and subjective refraction. Optom. Vis. Sci. 74, 434 438.
10. Farook, M., Venkatramani, J., Gazzard, G., Cheng, A., Tan, D. Saw, S. (2005) Comparisons of the handheld autorefractor, table-mounted autorefractor, and subjective refraction in Singapore adults. Optom. Vis. Sci. 82, 1066 1070.
11. Fick, H. H. (1972) Fortschrittliche Rechnungsarten in der Augenoptik. Folge 11. Der Augenoptiker. 12, 60 63.
12. Fick, H. H. (1973) Fortschrittliche Rechnungsarten in der Augenoptik. Folge 12. Der Augenoptiker. 2, 45 49.
13. Gillan, W. D. H. (2006) Multiple measures of refractive state of a test eye making use of a Nidek ARK-10000 OPD-scan. S. Afr. Optom 65, 144 149.
14. Grant, C., Nicholas, R., Moore, L. Salisbury, C. (2002) An observational study comparing quality of care in walk-in centres with general practice and NHS Direct using standardised patients. BMJ 324, 1556 1559.
15. Harris, W. F. (1990) Statistical inference on mean dioptric power. Hypothesis testing and confidence regions. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 10, 363 372.
16. Harris, W. F. (1991a) Representation of dioptric power in Euclidean 3-space. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 11, 121 129.
17. Harris, W. F. (1991b) Statistical inference on mean dioptric power, asymmetric powers and singular covariance. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 11, 263 269.
18. Harris, W. F. (1999) A unified paraxial approach to astigmatic optics. Optom. Vis. Sci. 76, 480 499.
19. Harris, W. F. (2001) Analysis of astigmatism in anterior segment surgery. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 27, 107 128.
20. Harris, W. F. (2005) Reduction of artefact in scatter plots of spherocylindrical data. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 25, 13 17.
21. Harvey, E. M., Miller, J. M., Wagner, L. K. Dobson, V. (1997) Reproducibility and accuracy of measurements with a hand held autorefractor in children. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 81, 941 948.
22. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) (1994) ISO 5725-1 Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results. Part 1: General Principles and Definitions. BSI, London, pp. 1 10.
23. Jennings, J. A. M. Charman, W. N. (1973) A comparison of errors in some methods of subjective refraction. Ophthal. Opt 13, 8 18.
24. Johnson, B. L., Edwards, J. S., Goss, D. A., Penisten, D. K. Fulk, G. W. (1996) A comparison of three subjective tests for astigmatism and their interexaminer reliabilities. J. Am. Optom. Assoc. 67, 590 598.
25. Keating, M. P. (1982) Advantages of a block matrix formulation for an astigmatic system. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt 59, 851 857.
26. Keating, M. P. (1986) Dioptric power in an off-axis meridian: the torsional component. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt 63, 830 838.
27. Koch, D. D. (2001) How should we analyze astigmatic data? J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 27, 1 3 (editorial).
28. Kratz, L. D. Flom, M. C. (1977) The Humphrey Vision Analyzer: reliability and validity of refractive error measures. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt 54, 653 659.
29. Leinonen, J., Laakkonen, E. Laatikainen, L. (2006) Repeatability (test-retest variability) of refractive error measurement in clinical settings. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 84, 532 536.
30. Long, W. F. (1976) A matrix formalism for decentration problems. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 53, 27 33.
31. MacKenzie, G. E., Badenhorst, A., Brand, C., van Niekerk, F., Burger, S. Hall, G. (2001) Variance in daily autokeratometric means across the menstrual cycle. S. Afr. Optom 60, 89 96.
32. Mallen, E. A., Wolffsohn, J. S., Gilmartin, B. Tsujimura, S. (2001) Clinical evaluation of the Shin-Nippon SRW-5000 autorefractor in adults. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 21, 101 107.
33. McKendrick, A. M. Brennan, N. A. (1995) Clinical evaluation of refractive techniques. J. Am. Optom. Assoc. 66, 758 765.
34. Naeser, K. Hjortdal, J. (2001) Polar value analysis of refractive data. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 27, 86 94.
35. Office of Public Sector Information (1989). The Opticians Act 1989. Published by HMSO, London. Available at: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ Ukpga_19890044_en_1.htm (accessed 15 August 2007).
36. Perrigin, J., Perrigin, D. Grosvenor, T. (1982) A comparison of clinical refractive data obtained by three examiners. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 59, 515 519.
37. Pesudovs, K. Weisinger, H. S. (2004) A comparison of autorefractor performance. Optom. Vis. Sci. 81, 554 558.
38. Raasch, T. W., Schechtman, K. B., Davis, L. J., Zadnik, K. the CLEK Study Group. (2001) Repeatability of subjective refraction in myopic and keratoconic subjects: results of vector analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 21, 376 383.
39. Rosenfield, M. Chiu, N. N. (1995) Repeatability of subjective and objective refraction. Optom. Vis. Sci. 72, 577 579.
40. Rubin, A. 1993) Short-Term Variation of Refractive Behavior in Human Eyes. Masters Thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, South Africa.
41. Salchow, D. J., Zirm, M. E., Steildorf, C. Parisi, A. (1999) Comparison of objective and subjective refraction before and after laser in situ keratomileusis. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 25, 827 835.
42. Sheedy, J., Schanz, P. Bullimore, M. (2004) Evaluation of an automated subjective refractor. Optom. Vis. Sci. 81, 334 340.
43. Sloan, A. E., Dunphy, E. B., Emmons, W. V. Gallagher, J. R. (1954) A comparison of refraction results on the same individuals. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 37, 696 699.
44. Thibos, L. N. Horner, D. (2001) Power vector analysis of the optical outcome of refractive surgery. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 27, 80 85.
45. Walline, J. J., Kinney, K. A., Zadnik, K. Mutti, D. O. (1999) Repeatability and validity of astigmatism measurements. J. Refract. Surg. 15, 23 31.
46. Zadnik, K., Mutti, D. O. Adams, A. J. (1992) The repeatability of measurement of the ocular components. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 33, 2325 2333.