Effect of Wavefront Autorefractor Design on Cycloplegic Refraction in Young Hyperopes: Monocular vs. Binocular

Objectives: To compare the objective refraction of young hyperopes obtained by two wavefront autorefractors with identical measurement principles but different optical designs: a monocular closed-field (VX 120) and a binocular open-field (Eye Refract), both developed by the same manufacturer (Vision...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Carracedo Rodríguez, Juan Gonzalo, Carpena Torres, Carlos, Pastrana Robles, Cristina, Rodríguez-Lafora Lorente, María, Privado Aroco, Ana, Serramito Blanco, María, Batres Valderas, Laura
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2025
País:España
Institución:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/123943
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/123943
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:617.7-001.15
Autorefraction
Objective refraction
Aberrometry
Aberrometer
Cycloplegia
Hyperopia
Ciencias Biomédicas
32 Ciencias Médicas
Descripción
Sumario:Objectives: To compare the objective refraction of young hyperopes obtained by two wavefront autorefractors with identical measurement principles but different optical designs: a monocular closed-field (VX 120) and a binocular open-field (Eye Refract), both developed by the same manufacturer (Visionix; Pont-de-l’Arche, France). Methods: A randomized, cross-sectional study was carried out with 37 hyperopic participants (18.2 ± 7.8 years; range 8 to 31 years). Each participant underwent two measurement sessions (one with and one without cycloplegia), during which three measurements were taken per autorefractor (monocular and binocular). Refractive variables (M, J0, and J45) were analyzed in one randomly selected eye. Results: The spherical equivalent (M) showed significant differences between autorefractors under noncycloplegic and cycloplegic conditions (p < 0.001). Without cycloplegia, the binocular autorefractor measured +0.45 (+1.49, −0.58) D more hyperopia than the monocular device. Under cycloplegia, this difference decreased to +0.26 D (+0.99, −0.48) D. Both autorefractors provided higher hyperopia with cycloplegia, with differences inversely correlated with age (r = −0.4; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Whenever possible, refraction in young hyperopes should be measured under cycloplegic conditions using a binocular open-field autorefractor to promote greater accommodative relaxation and ensure more reliable hyperopia measurements in both clinical practice and research.