ABSTRACT
Introduction: Refractive error is the most common visual impairment seen worldwide. This is one of the main cause for which patients come to ophthalmologist. This can occur at any age of the patient. Automated refractometer has become popularised method for doing refraction because of the busy practise of ophthalmologist and due to heavy patients load in screening camps. It is an easy method to learn, to operate and also time saving procedure. Patients are also very comfortable with it because of this easy procedure done in short time. But Streak retinoscopy which is considered as a Gold standard technique for refraction, has some difficulties like time consuming, dilatation of pupil and discomfort to the patient. Aim: Comparing the effect of the conventional method of refraction with computerized automated refraction in various refractive error patients. Materials and methods: It was an observational, cross-sectional study done in a 50 refractive error patients who attend Department of Ophthalmology OPD. Results: According to the statistical analysis done to compare the refraction values of the auto refractometer and streak retinoscopy with the patient's acceptance value, results came as streak Deepikadevi SN, Sundararajan D, Namitha Bhuvaneshwari K, Murali Krishnan. Comparing the effect of conventional method of retinoscopic refraction with computerized automated refraction in various refractive error patients. IAIM, 2017; 4(10): 105-110. Page 106 retinoscopy values had no significant difference with the patient's acceptance value. This study also shows males were more affected by refractive errors than females and the mean age of affection in myopia was 19- 20 years and hypermetropia is 33-36 years. Conclusion: Since reteak retinoscopy values are accepted well by the patients, it is the better method for refrection than auto refractometer
ABSTRACT
AIM: To observe the application of Suresight handheld auto- refractometer in measuring diopter of infants in Community Health Service Center. METHODS:Totally 836 cases ( 1 672 eyes ) from June 2013 to December 2013 were examined diopter of infants by Suresight handheld auto-refractometer in Community Health Service Center. RESULTS: Within 1 672 eyes of 836 infants were examined, 202 eyes were diagnosed ametropia, 38 eyes were suspicious, 240 eyes were transferred to the department of ophthalmology, the referral rate was 14.35%; 172 eyes were diagnosed ametropia, and the diagnosis rate of the referral patients was 71. 67%. Among 172 eyes, 46 eyes were provided with corrected glasses, accounting for 2. 75% of the number of screening, and 126 eyes were given intensive monitoring, accounting for 7.54% of the number of screening. CONCLUSION: Application of Suresight handheld auto-refractometer in refraction screening for infants in Community Health Service Center is convenient and effective. With two - way referral between community health service center and department of ophthalmology can monitor and intervene vision development of infants much earlier.