IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0219501.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing low-cost handheld autorefractors: A practical approach to measuring refraction in low-resource settings

Author

Listed:
  • Arunika Agarwal
  • David E Bloom
  • Vincent P deLuise
  • Alyssa Lubet
  • Kaushik Murali
  • Srinivas M Sastry

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and validate the accuracy and ease of use of handheld autorefractors against retinoscopic refraction by an ophthalmologist for assessing the visual acuity of older adults in India. Methods: 190 patients were enrolled at the Sankara Eye Hospital in Bangalore, India, to undergo refraction using three different handheld devices—Retinomax (Nikon Inc., Japan), Netra (Eyenetra, Inc., USA), and QuickSee (PlenOptika, Inc., USA)—and the results were compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy and refraction done by an ophthalmologist. We analyzed the mean, standard deviation (S.D.), and Bland-Altman comparison of dioptric (D) power accuracy. Results: The difference between the handheld devices and subjective refraction for each device was: Retinomax (N = 186), mean -0.41 D, S.D. 2.14; Netra (N = 179), mean 0.61 D, S.D. 2.20; and QuickSee (N = 182), mean -0.05 D, S.D. 1.04. Conclusion: The QuickSee and the Retinomax may be used successfully as refraction screening tools in epidemiologic studies of adults in India and as diagnostic tools in low-resource settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Arunika Agarwal & David E Bloom & Vincent P deLuise & Alyssa Lubet & Kaushik Murali & Srinivas M Sastry, 2019. "Comparing low-cost handheld autorefractors: A practical approach to measuring refraction in low-resource settings," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-8, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0219501
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0219501
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0219501&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0219501?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0219501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.