A comparison of a traditional and wavefront autorefraction

  • Lebow K
  • Campbell C
  • 16


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 4


    Citations of this article.


PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between the autorefraction function of the Canon RK-F2, an autorefractor/keratometer based on the ray deflection principle, and the Carl Zeiss Vision i.Profiler(Plus), an wavefront aberrometer, compared with each other and with a noncycloplegic subjective refraction. METHODS: Objective refraction results obtained using both instruments were compared with noncycloplegic subjective refractions for 174 eyes of 100 participants. Analysis of sphere, cylinder, and axis using spherical equivalent difference and a new measurement, cross-cylinder difference, was performed. The spherical equivalent refraction and cross-cylinder difference for the manifest refraction were compared using Bland-Altman limits of agreement and 95th percentile analysis. RESULTS: The 100 participants represent 52 women and 48 men with a mean (+/-SD) age of 51.7 (+/-13.8) years, an average (+/-SD) spherical power of -0.67 (+/-2.53) diopters (D), and an average (+/-SD) cylinder power of -0.94 (+/-0.87) D. The spherical equivalent difference is 0.03 D (Canon) and -0.11 D (Zeiss). The 95% limits of agreement for the spherical equivalent are -0.69 to 0.75 D (Canon) and -0.75 to 0.75 D (Zeiss). The mean cross-cylinder power difference is -0.08 D (Canon) and 0.02 D (Zeiss). The 95% limits of agreement for the cross-cylinder power difference are 0.63 to 0.50 D (Canon) and 0.49 to 0.75 D (Zeiss). The mean axis power difference is -0.04 D (Canon) and 0.05 D (Zeiss). The 95% limits of agreement for axis power difference are -0.71 to 0.63 D (Canon) and -0.78 to 0.78 D (Zeiss). The double-angle astigmatic plot center of distribution for the RK-F2 is 0.035 D at 70 degrees, and that for the i.Profiler(Plus) is 0.053 D at 32 degrees. CONCLUSIONS: Both instruments provided clinically useful spherical equivalent refractive data compared with a subjective refraction, whereas the Canon RK-F2 was slightly more accurate in determining the cylinder power compared with a subjective refraction.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Aberrometer
  • Autorefraction
  • Cross-cylinder difference
  • Refractive error
  • Spherical equivalent

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • Kenneth A. Lebow

  • Charles E. Campbell

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free