Polychromatic Refractive Error from Monochromatic Wavefront Aberrometry

Coe, C. D.; Bradley, Arthur; Thibos, Larry N.

doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000000361

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although wavefront aberrations have been reported for eccentricities beyond 13.58 (Jaeken & Artal, 2012;Lundstrom et al, 2009;Mathur et al, 2009), in our experience accurate measurements are limited to about 308 of eccentricity if the aberrometer relies on the Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensor for pupillometry (Shen, Clark, Soni, & Thibos, 2010). Defocus measurements were corrected to 552 nm (the centroid of the luminance spectrum of the accommodation target) using the Indiana Eye model of ocular chromatic aberration (Coe, Bradley, & Thibos, 2014;Nam, Rubinstein, & Thibos, 2010;Thibos, Ye, Zhang, & Bradley, 1992). Design princi-ples, technical specifications, and validation results for the basic instrument are available elsewhere .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uniformity of accommodation across the visual field

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We asked the question: Does accommodation change the eye's focusing power equally over the central visual field in emmetropic and myopic adult eyes? To answer this question we modified our laboratory scanning wavefront aberrometer to rapidly measure ocular refractive state over the central 30° diameter of visual field as a function of foveal accommodative demand. On average, ocular refractive state changed uniformly over the central visual field as the eye accommodated up to 6 D. Visual field maps of accommodative error (relative to a spherical target surface of constant vergence) reveal subtle patterns of deviation on the order of ± 0.5 D that are unique to the individual and relatively invariant to changes in accommodative state. Population mean maps for accommodative error are remarkably uniform across the central visual field, indicating the retina of the hypothetical "average eye" is conjugate to a sphere of constant target vergence for all states of accommodation, even though individual eyes might deviate from the mean due to random variations. No systematic difference between emmetropic and myopic eyes was evident. Since accuracy of accommodation across the central visual field is similar to that measured in the fovea, loss of image quality due to accommodative errors, which potentially drives myopia and may affect many aspects of visual function, will be similar across the central retina.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uniformity of accommodation across the visual field

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Methods to scale Zernike coefficients from one pupil size to another were developed by Schwiegerling (2002) and refined by others (Bara, Arines, Ares, & Prado, 2006;Dai, 2006;Díaz, Fernández-Dorado, Pizarro, & Arasa, 2009;Janssen & Dirksen, 2006;Mahajan, 2010). Methods to compute the polychromatic PSF from monochromatic data have also been developed (Artal, Santamaria, & Bescos, 1989;Coe, Bradley, & Thibos, 2014;Marcos, Burns, Moreno-Barriusop, & Navarro, 1999;Ravikumar, Thibos, & Bradley, 2008;Van Meeteren, 1974).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computing human optical point spread functions

Watson

2015

Journal of Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is renewed interest in the role of optics in human vision. At the same time there have been advances that allow for routine standardized measurement of the wavefront aberrations of the human eye. Computational methods have been developed to convert these measurements to a description of the human visual optical point spread function (PSF), and to thereby calculate the retinal image. However, tools to implement these calculations for vision science are not widely available or widely understood. In this report we describe software to compute the human optical PSF, and we discuss constraints and limitations.

show abstract

“…Finally, although the ISO standard has established the VIS wavelength range of 546 6 10nm for IOL testing 25 it is worth remarking that a single wavelength cannot fully represent the optical performance of the human eye under white (or in general polychromatic) light. 12,46,47 Overall, the discussed results raise concerns about the use of NIR light-based clinical instruments such as aberrometers and double-pass systems to correctly asses the optical quality at far and near distances of patients with DMIOL implants. This may help clinicians to better understand the results obtained when applying aberrometers and double pass systems for the assessment of eyes implanted with these lenses and alert people to a misleading use of such results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visible Versus Near-Infrared Optical Performance of Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Vega¹,

Millán²,

Vila-Terricabras³

et al. 2015

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In addition to changes in add power, the optical performances of the DMIOLs measured under either VIS or NIR illumination are considerably different. Whereas they show two distinct (near and far) foci under VIS light, their optical performances under NIR illumination are clearly biased in favor of their far focus. These results may help prevent a misleading use of NIR-based clinical instruments for the assessment of eyes implanted with DMIOLs.

show abstract

Polychromatic Refractive Error from Monochromatic Wavefront Aberrometry

Abstract: Subjective refractive error for white light can be accurately and precisely predicted objectively from monochromatic wavefront aberrations obtained for near-infrared light, but intersubject variability limits accuracy for individual subjects.

Cited by 12 publications

References 26 publications

Uniformity of accommodation across the visual field

Uniformity of accommodation across the visual field

Computing human optical point spread functions

Visible Versus Near-Infrared Optical Performance of Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About