Comparison of the Retinomax and Palm-AR Auto-Refractors: a pilot study.

摘要: PURPOSE To compare the performance of two handheld auto-refractors, Retinomax and Palm-Automatic Refractometer (Palm-AR), for detecting significant vision disorders in pre-school children. METHODS Children attending Philadelphia PreKindergarten Head Start were screened with Palm-AR underwent a gold standard eye examination. The results cycloplegic retinoscopy, cover testing, visual acuity used to classify children as having normal or one four conditions: amblyopia, strabismus, refractive error, reduced acuity. Pass/fail criteria each instrument selected maximize overall sensitivity (with specificity set at 90% 94%) targeted disorders. Comparisons sensitivities between auto-refractors performed using exact McNemar test. RESULTS Testability was >99% both instruments. Test time similar instruments (median 2 min; p=0.10). At specificity, detection more conditions 74% 78% Retinomax. 94% 66% error 84% 76% Palm AR 75% There high correlations sphere (r=0.85) cylinder (r=0.88) power. mean difference -0.13 diopters (D) (95% limit agreement: -2.28 2.02) sphere, -0.15 D -0.89 0.59) cylinder. CONCLUSIONS In this pilot study, appear comparable respect testability, sensitivity, specificity. strong agreement readings indicating that they may perform similarly screening setting.