Search

Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the level of agreement in keratometry measurements between a rotating Scheimpflug imaging-based system (Pentacam) and a handheld auto-refractokeratometer (handheld NIDEK ARK-30)., Method: This analytical cross-sectional study was conducted in the right eyes of 579 subjects. Keratometry measurements were conducted with the Pentacam and the handheld NIDEK ARK-30 systems. The SPSS Software version 22 and MedCalc V3 were applied to estimate descriptive statistics using paired t-test, Pearson correlation coefficient, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and Bland-Altman plot., Results: In the total sample, the inter-device difference in the mean flat and steep keratometry values was -0.266 diopter (D) (P-value<0.001) and 0.052D (P-value=0.093), respectively. There was a significant difference in mean flat keratometry between the two devices in all groups of refractive errors (paired difference <0.5D and P-value<0.001). The difference in mean steep keratometry was significant only in myopic subjects (P-value=0.046). The 95% LoA between the two devices measurements was 2.51D, 3.98D, and 6.37D for flat keratometry and 2.6D, 3.2D, and 3.9D for steep keratometry in emmetropic, myopic, and hyperopic subjects, respectively., Conclusion: Our study showed relatively wide limits of agreement between handheld NIDEK ARK-30 and Pentacam; therefore, these devices cannot be used interchangeably for measuring corneal curvature., (Copyright © 2019 Spanish General Council of Optometry. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of accommodative insufficiency (AI) and its relation with age, gender, and refractive errors in a college-age student population in Iran., Methods: The present study was conducted cross-sectionally in 2017. All students had optometric tests including measurement of visual acuity, objective and subjective refraction, as well as binocular vision and accommodative examinations. Amplitude of accommodation was measured with the Donders' push-up method using the Royal Air Force (RAF) rule. Monocular accommodative facility was measured with ±2.00diopter flipper lenses. The accommodative response was tested using dynamic retinoscopy with the monocular estimation method (MEM)., Results: The prevalence of AI in the studied population was 4.07% (95% CI: 2.61-5.52). The rate was 6.04% (95% CI: 3.58-8.50) in females and 2.01% (95% CI: 0.53-3.48) in males, and logistic regression showed a significantly higher odds of AI in females (OR=3.14, 95% CI: 1.33-7.45, p-value=0.009). The prevalence of AI was 2.59% (95% CI: 0.55-7.56) in the 18-19-year-old age group and 4.08% (95% CI: 0.09-8.07) in the 24-25-year-old group (p-value=0.848). The prevalence of AI among emmetropic, myopic, and hyperopic individuals was 3.74% (95% CI: 1.88-5.61), 4.44% (95% CI: 2.07-6.81), and 5.26% (95% CI: 4.79-16.32), respectively (p-value=0.869). In the multiple regression model, only gender showed significant relationship with AI (Odds ratio=3.14, 95% CI: 1.33-7.45; p-values=0.009)., Conclusion: The prevalence of AI in the present study is lower than the most prevalence rates reported in previous studies. In the present study, gender and AI showed a strong association, such that AI prevalence was significantly higher in females than males., (Copyright © 2018 Spanish General Council of Optometry. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship patterns between astigmatism axes of fellow eyes (rule similarity and symmetry) and to determine the prevalence of each pattern in the studied population., Methods: This population-based study was conducted in 2015 in Iran. All participants had tests for visual acuity, objective refraction, subjective refraction (if cooperative), and assessment of eye health at the slit-lamp. Axis symmetry was based on two different patterns: direct (equal axes) and mirror (mirror image symmetry) or enantiomorphism. Bilateral astigmatism was classified as isorule if fellow eyes had the same orientation (e.g. both eyes were with-the-rule) and as anisorule if otherwise., Results: Of the total cases of bilateral astigmatism, 80% were isorule, and in the studied population, the prevalence of isorule and anisorule astigmatism was 14.89% and 3.53%, respectively. The prevalence of isorule increased with age (p<0.001). The prevalence of both isorule and anisorule increased at higher degrees of spherical ametropia (p<0.001). Median inter-ocular axis difference was 10° in mirror symmetry and 20° in direct symmetry with no significant difference between two genders (p>0.288). Both symmetry patterns reduced with age (p<0.001). Among cases of bilateral astigmatism, 15.5% and 19.8% had exact direct and mirror symmetry, respectively., Conclusion: Bilateral astigmatism is mainly isorule in the population and anisorule astigmatism is rare. The enantiomorphism is the most common pattern in the population of bilateral astigmatism., (Copyright © 2018 Spanish General Council of Optometry. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)