Anterior chamber depth and axial length affect clinical performance of Spot Vision
            Screener

Yakar, Konuralp

doi:10.5935/0004-2749.20200009

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In another study, Yakar stated that SVS without cycloplegia had 59% sensitivity and 94% speci city for detecting the risk factors of amblyopia compared to the autorefractometer with cycloplegia [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, in the present study, we wanted to investigate the potential relationships between SVS and AL/CR, which have never been studied. The only related study in the literature is one by Yakar that compared the performance of SVS with those of ACD and AL without cycloplegia [15]. That study found a negative correlation between them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SVS sensitivity has been reported as 60.9%-89.8% and its speci city as 70.4%-94.9% [8,[12][13][14]. However, few studies have investigated factors that may affect SVS performance [15]. The aim of the present study was to compare SVS measurements made with and without cycloplegia with biometric parameters to identify the factors that may affect SVS performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results

Alis

Alış

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

objective: Our aim in this study is to investigate the relationship between biometric parameters and spot vision screener [SVS]Materyal-Metods: 250 eyes of 125 children between the age of 6,77±1,59 included the study. The results of cyloplegic [CSVS] and noncycloplegic [NSVS] spot vision screener [Plusoptix p12,Germany] measurements and autorefractometer with cycloplegia [CA] were compared. The spherical equivalent [SE] differences of between CA and NSVS measurements with CA and CSVS measurements were compared with AL, ACD, CR, Mean K and AL / CR values. The relationship between them was examined.Results: According to the amblyopia risk factors [ARFs] based on the criteria from AAPOS 2013 guidelines , 33 eyes [13%] in the NSVS results and 34 eyes [13.6%] in the CSVS results were detected as amblyopic. According to CA results, NSVS had 67.3% sensitivity, 94.5% specificity, CSVS 69.4% sensitivity and 89.1% specificity in detecting amblyopia. When the SE differences of between CA and NSVS values were comparaed with biometric parameters a negative correlation was observed with ACD , AL and especially AL/CR ratio .Conclussion: Both NSVS and CSVS showed moderate sensitivity and high specificity in detecting AFRs based on the criteria from AAPOS 2013 guidelines. CSVS has no additional clinical advantage. Biometric parameters effect the NSVS results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results

Alis

Alış

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference between Plusoptix and cycloplegic measurements was significantly higher in hyperopes than in myopes (0.73 ± 1.34 vs. 0.05 ± 0.66; p = 0.010). Yakar et al showed that non-cycloplegic measurements with the Spot were negative more often than cycloplegic measurements with the ARK-1 device (median: +0.25 vs. +1.12 D) [ 19 ]. The greater difference observed in that study could be partially explained by the fact that it was conducted on children aged 3–10 years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement in non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction between a photoscreener and a calibrated autorefractor

Kanclerz,

Przewłócka,

Arnold

2024

BMC Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Photoscreeners have been shown to provide excellent measurements of the refractive error. However, whether they could be used for assessing cycloplegic refraction has not been examied. This study aimed to evaluate the agreement between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic measurements obtained using a photoscreener and stationary autorefractor, respectively. Methods This study included all patients undergoing routine ophthalmic examination at the Hygeia Clinic (Poland) from June to July 2022. Each patient underwent non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction assessments using the 2WIN photoscreener (Adaptica SRL, Padova, Italy) and an ARK-1 stationary autorefractor ARK-1 (Nidek Co Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), respectively. Each pair of assessments was conducted in random order, and all values were determined at a vertical distance of 12 mm. The agreement between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic measurements was assessed using paired t-tests, Bland-Altman and ABCD ellipsoids. Results This analysis included 82 patients, of which 52 were female. Their mean age was 34.39 ± 13.13 years. The non-cycloplegic spherical equivalent (SE) did not differ significantly between the 2WIN (− 1.22 ± 2.45) and ARK-1 (− 1.19 ± 2.96) devices (p = 0.580). However, the cycloplegic SE values demonstrated more negative values with the 2WIN device (− 1.13 ± 2.19) than with the ARK-1 device (− 0.75 ± 3.03; p = 0.007). The non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic measurements were strongly correlated between the devices (r = 0.9473 and 0.9411, respectively). However, the correlation between their cycloplegic shifts in SE was low (r = 0.2645). Ellipsoid refraction aligned better non-cycloplegic (ARK-1 = 1.00; 2WIN = 1.74) than with cycloplegic refraction (ARK-1 = 1.43; 2WIN = 1.90). Conclusion While the cycloplegic measurements obtained with the 2WIN photoscreener were strongly correlated with those obtained with the ARK-1 stationary autorefractor for most of the analyzed parameters, they should not be considered interchangeable.

show abstract

Photoscreener results with and without cycloplegia and their reliability according to biometric parameters

Alis

Alış

2022

Journal Français d'Ophtalmologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anterior chamber depth and axial length affect clinical performance of Spot Vision Screener

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results

Agreement in non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction between a photoscreener and a calibrated autorefractor

Photoscreener results with and without cycloplegia and their reliability according to biometric parameters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Anterior chamber depth and axial length affect clinical performance of Spot Vision Screener

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The Effect of Biometric Parameters&nbsp;on Spot Vision Screener Results

The Effect of Biometric Parameters&nbsp;on Spot Vision Screener Results

Agreement in non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction between a photoscreener and a calibrated autorefractor

Photoscreener results with and without cycloplegia and their reliability according to biometric parameters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results

The Effect of Biometric Parameters on Spot Vision Screener Results