Cycloplegia Improves the Inter-Optometrist Repeatability of Subjective Refraction

Background: Since accommodation may be a source of error affecting the inter-optometrist repeatability of subjective refraction, this study investigated whether the use of cycloplegia could improve this repeatability. Methods: A randomized cross-sectional study was conducted on 42 young hyperopes (1...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Carlos Carpena-Torres, Maria Rodríguez-Lafora, Cristina Pastrana, Ana Privado-Aroco, María Serramito, Laura Batres, Gonzalo Carracedo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2024-12-01
Series:Photonics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6732/11/12/1180
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Since accommodation may be a source of error affecting the inter-optometrist repeatability of subjective refraction, this study investigated whether the use of cycloplegia could improve this repeatability. Methods: A randomized cross-sectional study was conducted on 42 young hyperopes (18.2 ± 7.7 years, range 6 to 31 years). Subjective refraction was performed by two different optometrists in two measurement sessions: one day without cycloplegia and, on a different day, with cycloplegia, in random order. The inter-optometrist repeatability of all refractive variables (M, J0, and J45) was analyzed, selecting one eye randomly, in terms of the 95% confidence interval of repeatability (<i>r</i>). Results: No statistically significant differences were found between the optometrists for any refractive variable, both with and without cycloplegia (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05). Furthermore, no correlation was found between participants’ age and the refractive differences between optometrists under both cycloplegic conditions (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05). However, the use of cycloplegia improved the inter-optometrist repeatability of M (<i>r</i> = 0.37 D) compared to the non-cycloplegic measurements (<i>r</i> = 0.62 D). Conclusions: These results suggest that accommodation in young hyperopes is likely a primary source of error that could explain the discrepancies in subjective refraction between optometrists.
ISSN:2304-6732