Journal article
Comparison of the Retinomax and Palm-AR Auto-Refractors: A Pilot Study
Optometry and vision science, v 88(7), pp 830-836
01 Jul 2011
PMID: 21516050
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
Purpose. To compare the performance of two handheld auto-refractors, the Retinomax and the Palm-Automatic Refractometer (Palm-AR), for detecting significant vision disorders in pre-school children.
Methods. Children attending Philadelphia PreKindergarten Head Start were screened with the Retinomax and Palm-AR and underwent a gold standard eye examination. The results of cycloplegic retinoscopy, cover testing, and visual acuity were used to classify children as having normal vision or one of four conditions: amblyopia, strabismus, significant refractive error, and reduced visual acuity. Pass/fail criteria for each instrument were selected to maximize overall sensitivity (with specificity set at 90% and at 94%) for detecting targeted disorders. Comparisons of sensitivities between the auto-refractors were performed using the exact McNemar test.
Results. Testability was >99% for both instruments. Test time was similar for the two instruments (median 2 min; p = 0.10). At 90% specificity, the sensitivity for detection of one or more targeted conditions was 74% for the Palm-AR and 78% for the Retinomax. At 94% specificity, the sensitivity for detection of one or more targeted conditions was 66% for both the Palm-AR and the Retinomax. At 90% specificity, the sensitivity for detecting significant refractive error was 84% for both auto-refractors, and at 94% specificity, the sensitivity was 76% for the Palm AR and 75% for the Retinomax. There were high correlations between the instruments for sphere (r = 0.85) and cylinder (r = 0.88) power. The mean difference between instruments was -0.13 diopters (D) (95% limit of agreement: -2.28 to 2.02) for sphere, and -0.15 D (95% limit of agreement: -0.89 to 0.59) for cylinder.
Conclusions. In this pilot study, the Retinomax and Palm-AR appear comparable with respect to testability, sensitivity, and specificity. There was strong agreement in readings of sphere and cylinder indicating that they may perform similarly in a screening setting. (Optom Vis Sci 2011; 88: 830-836)
Metrics
4 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Comparison of the Retinomax and Palm-AR Auto-Refractors: A Pilot Study
- Creators
- Elise Ciner - Salus UniversityAshanti Carter - Univ Penn, Dept Ophthalmol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USAGui-Shuang Ying - Univ Penn, Dept Ophthalmol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USAMaureen Maguire - Univ Penn, Dept Ophthalmol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USAMarjean Taylor Kulp - The Ohio State UniversityVision Preschoolers VIP Study Grp
- Publication Details
- Optometry and vision science, v 88(7), pp 830-836
- Publisher
- Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
- Number of pages
- 7
- Grant note
- U10EY012547 / NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE; United States Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA; NIH National Eye Institute (NEI) U10EY12644; U10EY12547; U10EY12545; U10EY12550; U10EY12534; U10EY12647; U10EY12648; U10EY12545-04S1; R21EY018908 / National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health Human Services; United States Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA; NIH National Eye Institute (NEI)
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Pennsylvania College of Optometry (PCO)
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000292134800008
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-79960356037
- Other Identifier
- 991022089043804721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Ophthalmology