Evaluating Self-Refraction and Ready-Made Spectacles for Treatment of Uncorrected Refractive Error
Andrew Camp, Thomas S Shane, Julia Kang, Benjamin J. Thomas, Cameron Pole, Richard K. Lee
Abstract
Andrew Camp, Thomas S Shane, Julia Kang, Benjamin J. Thomas, Cameron Pole, Richard K. Lee
Abstract
PURPOSE: Uncorrected refractive error is the leading cause of visual impairment worldwide and has significant quality of life and economic implications. Treatment with subjective refraction and custom-made spectacles requires expensive equipment and highly trained personnel. We examine several alternatives. METHODS: Patients were taught to self-refract using two devices: AdSpecs and the I-test Vision Screener. Ready-made spectacles were fit to the self-refraction and visual acuity (VA) was measured. Donated-spectacles were fit to subjective refraction and VA was measured. Self-refraction and donated spectacles spherical equivalent (SE) and VA were compared to subjective refraction SE and VA. RESULTS: = 0.91). There was no significant difference between best-corrected VA by subjective refraction and VA treated by ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction by either device (analysis of variance (ANOVA), p non-significant). Patients fit with donated spectacles had significantly worse VA than best-corrected VA by subjective refraction (ANOVA, p < 0.01), although 80% improved to >20/40. CONCLUSION: Patients accurately self-refract using both devices and ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction have excellent visual outcomes. Donated spectacles have worse visual outcomes but might be useful in a subset of patients. Ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction may provide a treatment alternative to uncorrected refractive error.
OpenAlex reports 8 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.
PURPOSE: Uncorrected refractive error is the leading cause of visual impairment worldwide and has significant quality of life and economic implications. Treatment with subjective refraction and custom-made spectacles requires expensive equipment and highly trained personnel. We examine several alternatives. METHODS: Patients were taught to self-refract using two devices: AdSpecs and the I-test Vision Screener. Ready-made spectacles were fit to the self-refraction and visual acuity (VA) was measured. Donated-spectacles were fit to subjective refraction and VA was measured. Self-refraction and donated spectacles spherical equivalent (SE) and VA were compared to subjective refraction SE and VA. RESULTS: = 0.91). There was no significant difference between best-corrected VA by subjective refraction and VA treated by ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction by either device (analysis of variance (ANOVA), p non-significant). Patients fit with donated spectacles had significantly worse VA than best-corrected VA by subjective refraction (ANOVA, p < 0.01), although 80% improved to >20/40. CONCLUSION: Patients accurately self-refract using both devices and ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction have excellent visual outcomes. Donated spectacles have worse visual outcomes but might be useful in a subset of patients. Ready-made spectacles fit to self-refraction may provide a treatment alternative to uncorrected refractive error.
Key concepts: Medicine, Optometry, Refraction, Refractive error, Subjective refraction, Ophthalmology, Optics, Visual acuity