首页> 外文期刊>Investigative ophthalmology & visual science >Accuracy of Noncycloplegic Retinoscopy, Retinomax Autorefractor, and SureSight Vision Screener for Detecting Significant Refractive Errors
【24h】

Accuracy of Noncycloplegic Retinoscopy, Retinomax Autorefractor, and SureSight Vision Screener for Detecting Significant Refractive Errors

机译:非睫状肌检影检影仪,Retinomax自动验光仪和SureSight视觉筛查仪检测重大屈光不正的准确性

获取原文
       

摘要

Purpose.: To evaluate, by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the ability of noncycloplegic retinoscopy (NCR), Retinomax Autorefractor (Retinomax), and SureSight Vision Screener (SureSight) to detect significant refractive errors (RE) among preschoolers. Methods.: Refraction results of eye care professionals using NCR, Retinomax, and SureSight (n = 2588) and of nurse and lay screeners using Retinomax and SureSight (n = 1452) were compared with masked cycloplegic retinoscopy results. Significant RE was defined as hyperopia greater than +3.25 diopters (D), myopia greater than 2.00 D, astigmatism greater than 1.50 D, and anisometropia greater than 1.00 D interocular difference in hyperopia, greater than 3.00 D interocular difference in myopia, or greater than 1.50 D interocular difference in astigmatism. The ability of each screening test to identify presence, type, and/or severity of significant RE was summarized by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and calculated from weighted logistic regression models. Results.: For detection of each type of significant RE, AUC of each test was high; AUC was better for detecting the most severe levels of RE than for all REs considered important to detect (AUC 0.97a??1.00 vs. 0.92a??0.93). The area under the curve of each screening test was high for myopia (AUC 0.97a??0.99). Noncycloplegic retinoscopy and Retinomax performed better than SureSight for hyperopia (AUC 0.92a??0.99 and 0.90a??0.98 vs. 0.85a??0.94, P a?¤ 0.02), Retinomax performed better than NCR for astigmatism greater than 1.50 D (AUC 0.95 vs. 0.90, P = 0.01), and SureSight performed better than Retinomax for anisometropia (AUC 0.85a??1.00 vs. 0.76a??0.96, P a?¤ 0.07). Performance was similar for nurse and lay screeners in detecting any significant RE (AUC 0.92a??1.00 vs. 0.92a??0.99). Conclusions.: Each test had a very high discriminatory power for detecting children with any significant RE.
机译:目的:通过接受者操作特征(ROC)分析,评估非睫状肌麻痹检影(NCR),Retinomax自动验光仪(Retinomax)和SureSight Vision Screener(SureSight)检测学龄前儿童中重大屈光不正(RE)的能力。方法:将使用NCR,Retinomax和SureSight(n = 2588)的眼保健专业人员的折射结果以及使用Retinomax和SureSight(n = 1452)的护士和产科检查者的折射结果与蒙面睫状肌麻痹检影法进行比较。显着性RE定义为远视眼大于+3.25屈光度(D),近视眼大于2.00 D,散光大于1.50 D,屈光参差大于1.00 D,近视眼内差异大于3.00 D或大于1.50 D眼内散光差异。 ROC曲线(AUC)下的面积总结了每种筛选测试识别出显着RE的存在,类型和/或严重性的能力,并根据加权Logistic回归模型进行了计算。结果:为了检测每种类型的显着RE,每个测试的AUC较高;与所有被认为重要的RE相比,AUC能够更好地检测最严重的RE(AUC0.97a≤1.00与0.92a≤0.93)。对于近视,每次筛选测试的曲线下面积都很高(AUC0.97a≤0.99)。对于远视,非睫状肌检影检影和Retinomax的表现优于SureSight(AUC0.92a≤0.99和0.90a≤0.98与0.85a≤0.94,P a?¤0.02),Retinomax对散光大于1.50 D的表现优于NCR。 AUC 0.95 vs. 0.90,P = 0.01),SureSight在屈光参差方面的表现优于Retinomax(AUC0.85a≤1.00与0.76a≤0.96,Pa≤0.07)。对于护士和产科筛查者,在检测任何显着的RE方面的表现相似(AUC0.92a≤1.00与0.92a≤0.99)。结论:每种测试对发现任何显着RE的儿童都具有很高的辨别力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号