2006PubMedRequires access

[Focusing strength and a subjective method for determining refraction].

Sergienko Nm, Timoshchuk Rl

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Three hundred and seventy-four eyes were examined by a subjective method, by using trial lenses in natural accommodation. This yielded the following distribution of clinical refraction: hypermetropia (43.6%), emmetropia (30.8%), myopia (12.8%), and astigmatism (12.8%). The classical subjective method of refractometry is based on the schematic eye having no focusing strength. The currently available data by a number of authors show that the focusing strength of more than 0.5 diopters is typical of the human eye, which affects the results of refractometry. When the collecting glass +0.25 D or +0.5 D is applied, the eye with a visual acuity of 1.0 or more retains the level of vision due to the holding the focusing strength across the retina rather than the accommodation strength. By taking in account the correction, the distribution in the study group was as follows: emmetropia (73.0%), myopia (12.8%), astigmatism (12.8%), and hypermetropia (1.4%).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Three hundred and seventy-four eyes were examined by a subjective method, by using trial lenses in natural accommodation. This yielded the following distribution of clinical refraction: hypermetropia (43.6%), emmetropia (30.8%), myopia (12.8%), and astigmatism (12.8%). The classical subjective method of refractometry is based on the schematic eye having no focusing strength. The currently available data by a number of authors show that the focusing strength of more than 0.5 diopters is typical of the human eye, which affects the results of refractometry. When the collecting glass +0.25 D or +0.5 D is applied, the eye with a visual acuity of 1.0 or more retains the level of vision due to the holding the focusing strength across the retina rather than the accommodation strength. By taking in account the correction, the distribution in the study group was as follows: emmetropia (73.0%), myopia (12.8%), astigmatism (12.8%), and hypermetropia (1.4%).

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Three hundred and seventy-four eyes were examined by a subjective method, by using trial lenses in natural accommodation. This yielded the following distribution of clinical refraction: hypermetropia (43.6%), emmetropia (30.8%), myopia (12.8%), and astigmatism (12.8%). The classical subjective method of refractometry is based on the schematic eye having no focusing strength. The currently available data by a number of authors show that the focusing strength of more than 0.5 diopters is typical of the human eye, which affects the results of refractometry. When the collecting glass +0.25 D or +0.5 D is applied, the eye with a visual acuity of 1.0 or more retains the level of vision due to the holding the focusing strength across the retina rather than the accommodation strength. By taking in account the correction, the distribution in the study group was as follows: emmetropia (73.0%), myopia (12.8%), astigmatism (12.8%), and hypermetropia (1.4%).

Key concepts: Emmetropia, Astigmatism, Hypermetropia, Dioptre, Refractometry, Accommodation, Refraction, Optometry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Focusing strength and a subjective method for determining refraction]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens