Repeatability of Subjective Refraction in Different Age Groups

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the inter-examiner repeatability of subjective refraction across diverse age cohorts, an aspect not previously investigated. Methods: A cross-sectional, randomized study enrolled 86 participants (mean age: 37.0 ± 18.0 years), distributed into three...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Carpena Torres, Carlos, Batres Valderas, Laura, Serramito Blanco, María, Carracedo Rodríguez, Juan Gonzalo
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2024
País:España
Institución:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/113531
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/113531
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:535.31
Repeatability
Subjective refraction
Age
Myopia
Hyperopia
Astigmatism
Óptica y optometría
2209 Óptica
Descripción
Sumario:Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the inter-examiner repeatability of subjective refraction across diverse age cohorts, an aspect not previously investigated. Methods: A cross-sectional, randomized study enrolled 86 participants (mean age: 37.0 ± 18.0 years), distributed into three groups: youth, non-presbyopic adults, and presbyopic adults. Each participant underwent three subjective refractions by three different optometrists on separate days. Repeatability analysis encompassed all refractive variables (M, J0, and J45). Results: There were no significant differences between optometrists in all refractive variables for either the overall sample or across age groups (p ≥ 0.05). Additionally, no correlation was found between participants’ age and the mean difference in refractive variables across optometrists (p ≥ 0.05). The 95% confidence interval of repeatability (r) for the total sample was ±0.70 D for M, ±0.29 for J0, and ±0.21 D for J45. Conclusions: Based on these findings and previous research, it is suggested to establish 95% limits of agreement of ±0.75 D for M, and between ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D for both J0 and J45 when validating new refraction systems compared to subjective refraction as the gold standard, regardless of the age of the subjects evaluated.