Comparison of Plusoptix S12R photoscreener with cycloplegic retinoscopy and autorefraction in pediatric age group

Abstract

Purpose:To compare refractive measurements of noncycloplegic photoscreener Plusoptix S12R with cycloplegic retinoscopy, noncycloplegic autorefractor, and cycloplegic autorefractor in children.Methods:The study population (200 eyes of 100 children) was divided into two groups: Group 1 (age 3–7 years) and Group 2 (age 8–15 years). In Group 1, Plusoptix was compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy. In Group 2, Plusoptix was compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy and autorefraction. The second group was made because the younger group was found to be uncooperative for autorefraction. Paired t-test and Pearson's correlation were used for statistical analysis.Results:The mean difference in sphere (DS), spherical equivalent (DSE), and cylinder (DC) between cycloplegic retinoscopy and Plusoptix in Group 1 was 0.68 ± 0.55 (P < 0.001), 0.77 ± 0.61 (P < 0.001), and 0.18 ± 0.28 (P < 0.001), respectively. In Group 2, DS, DSE, and DC between cycloplegic retinoscopy and Plusoptix were 0.86 ± 0.49 (P < 0.001), 0.97 ± 0.51 (P < 0.001), and 0.23 ± 0.28 (P < 0.001); between cycloplegic autorefractor and Plusoptix were 0.69 ± 0.47 (P < 0.001), 0.74 ± 0.49 (P < 0.001), and 0.10 ± 0.31 (P = 0.002); and between noncycloplegic autorefractor and Plusoptix were − 0.25 ± 0.39 (P < 0.001), −0.19 ± 0.41 (P < 0.001), and 0.11 ± 0.31 (P < 0.001), respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficients of S, SE, and C between Plusoptix and cycloplegic retinoscopy were 0.948, 0.938, and 0.924 in Group 1 and 0.972, 0.972, and 0.946 in Group 2, and these values were statistically significant. Bland–Altman plots showed good agreement between cycloplegic retinoscopy and Plusoptix in both groups. Plusoptix gave axis values within 10° of cycloplegic retinoscopy in 81.56% of eyes in Group 1 and in 71.44% of eyes in Group 2.Conclusion:Plusoptix photoscreener can be used for prescription of axis of cylinder in children; however, other refractive measurements must be refined by cycloplegic retinoscopy.

Comparative Study of Refraction between Wave Front-Based Refraction and Autorefraction without and with Cycloplegia in Children and Adolescents

“…Saini et al also reported an increase of 0.94D and 0.93D in the sphere and SE, respectively, in children (3–7 years). They found a cylinder difference of 0.02D after cycloplegia with an autorefractor [ 40 ]. Payerols et al found an SE increase of 1.02D after cycloplegia in a Nidek ARK-530A autorefractor in children older than 3 years, and of 3.16D under cycloplegia in a portable Retinomax autorefrator in children younger than 3 years.…”

Comparison between Plusoptix A09 and gold standard cycloplegic refraction in preschool children and agreement to detect refractive amblyogenic risk factors

“…(0.94, 0, 92, 0.93). [ 4 11 20 25 ] Good correlation was reported between Plusoptix screener and cycloplegic refraction by Payerols et al . The authors highlighted the need for large scale population-based studies to corroborate the findings.…”

Comparison of Refractive Disorders in Adulthood Measured by Using HandyRef-K, Retinomax, PlusOptix and Table Top Autorefractometer

“…Patient accommodation can lead to more myopic values when using the RTX without cycloplegia, and more hyperopic values with the PO may be related to the fact that measurements are taken from a distance of 1 meter, eliminating the factor of accommodation. The PO can detect strabismus, refractive errors, and even media opacity, potentially eliminating the need for a dilated fundus examination in some patients (17).…”