We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Studies
Clinical comparison of 6 aberrometers. Part 2: statistical comparison in a test group.
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery 2006 January
PURPOSE: To compare and mutually validate the measurements of 6 aberrometers: the Visual Function Analyzer (Tracey), the OPD-Scan (ARK-10000, Nidek), the Zywave (Bausch & Lomb), the WASCA (Carl Zeiss Meditec), the MultiSpot Hartmann-Shack device, and the Allegretto Wave Analyzer.
SETTING: University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on a group of 44 healthy eyes with refractions ranging from -5.25 diopters (D) to +5.25 D (cylinder 0 to -2 D). For each aberrometer and each eye, the averaged Zernike data were used to calculate various kinds of root-mean-square (RMS). These parameters, together with the refractive parameters, were then analyzed with a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, complemented by paired t tests. A similar analysis was done for the comparison of the variances of these parameters.
RESULTS: The aberrometers gave comparable values for all studied parameters with the following exceptions: The OPD-Scan underestimated the polynomials describing 4- and 5-fold symmetries, and the Visual Function Analyzer slightly overestimated the astigmatism terms. The 3rd-order radial RMS value was different for each device, as well as the RMS in the central 2.0 mm zone. The WASCA presented the lowest variance.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that in healthy eyes, all aberrometers produced globally similar results but they may vary in some details.
SETTING: University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on a group of 44 healthy eyes with refractions ranging from -5.25 diopters (D) to +5.25 D (cylinder 0 to -2 D). For each aberrometer and each eye, the averaged Zernike data were used to calculate various kinds of root-mean-square (RMS). These parameters, together with the refractive parameters, were then analyzed with a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, complemented by paired t tests. A similar analysis was done for the comparison of the variances of these parameters.
RESULTS: The aberrometers gave comparable values for all studied parameters with the following exceptions: The OPD-Scan underestimated the polynomials describing 4- and 5-fold symmetries, and the Visual Function Analyzer slightly overestimated the astigmatism terms. The 3rd-order radial RMS value was different for each device, as well as the RMS in the central 2.0 mm zone. The WASCA presented the lowest variance.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that in healthy eyes, all aberrometers produced globally similar results but they may vary in some details.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app