A comparison of cycloplegic refraction to the near retinoscopy technique for refractive error determination.
M D Wesson, K. Mann, N W Bray
Abstract
M D Wesson, K. Mann, N W Bray
Abstract
The near retinoscopy technique of refractive error determination was compared to the standard method of cycloplegic refraction using 10 "infants" (3-12 months of age) and 10 "children" (32-109 months of age). There was a significant difference between the techniques for both sphere and cylinder power. Although there was no interaction of refractive technique and age group, the difference between near retinoscopy and cycloplegic refractive error tended to be larger for infants than for children. No significant difference was found when the average refractive values were compared for monocular or binocular conditions and no significant effect was found for either gender or laterality (right versus left eye). Based on these findings, it is suggested that caution be used in substituting the near retinoscopy technique for cycloplegic refraction even utilizing a "correction" factor for the dioptric difference between techniques.
OpenAlex reports 17 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The near retinoscopy technique of refractive error determination was compared to the standard method of cycloplegic refraction using 10 "infants" (3-12 months of age) and 10 "children" (32-109 months of age). There was a significant difference between the techniques for both sphere and cylinder power. Although there was no interaction of refractive technique and age group, the difference between near retinoscopy and cycloplegic refractive error tended to be larger for infants than for children. No significant difference was found when the average refractive values were compared for monocular or binocular conditions and no significant effect was found for either gender or laterality (right versus left eye). Based on these findings, it is suggested that caution be used in substituting the near retinoscopy technique for cycloplegic refraction even utilizing a "correction" factor for the dioptric difference between techniques.
Key concepts: Retinoscopy, Refractive error, Refraction, Cycloplegia, Optometry, Subjective refraction, Significant difference, Medicine