电脑验光仪和综合验光仪联合应用的临床评价  

Clinical evaluation of combined optometry of auto refract-keratometer and phoroptor

作　　者：黄建艳[1] 陈剑[1] 周清[1] 徐锦堂[1] 

机构地区：[1]暨南大学医学院第一附属医院眼科,广州510632

出　　处：《眼科新进展》2002年第6期405-407,共3页Recent Advances in Ophthalmology

摘　　要：目的　评价电脑自动验光与综合验光仪主动验光联合应用的临床价值。方法　根据扩瞳与否按年龄段分 A、B组。 A组 3～ 16岁 10 0例 ,小瞳和扩瞳后分别行电脑验光 ;B组 17～ 5 5岁 96例 ,仅行小瞳电脑验光。所有患者均在综合验光仪进行主觉验光。结果　 A组小瞳和扩瞳电脑验光球镜度数有显著性差异 (P<0 .0 5 ) ,扩瞳电脑验光与综合验光仪主觉验光球镜度数差异无显著意义 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,符合率为86 % .B组电脑验光与综合验光仪主觉验光的球镜度数无显著性差异 (P>0 .0 5 ) ,小瞳验光与综合验光仪散光轴位的差异无显著意义 (P>0 .0 5 ) ,符合率为 91.6 % .Objective To evaluate the clinical value of combined optometry of auto refract keratometer and phoroptor .Methods The age groups were divided into A and B according to whether the cycloplegic was used. To perform a series of comparative measurements, autorefractor readings were obtained on children aged 3~16 years before or after cycloplegia (A group) and on healthy adults aged 17~55 years without cycloplegia (B group) with the Speedy K auto refract keratometer. All the subjects were subjective refracted with phoroptor. Results There was significant difference between before and after cycloplegia in A group in terms of the sphere changes ( P >0.05).There was no significant difference between autorefraction after cycloplegia and subjective refraction with phoroptor in terms of the sphere changes ( P >0.05) and a high coincidence of 86% was founded. There was no significant difference between the two different ways of optometry in B group in terms of the sphere changes ( P >0.05). Also, there was no significant difference between autorefraction without cyclopegia and subjective refraction in B group in terms of the cylinder axis changes ( P >0.05) with a high coincidence of 91.6%.Conclusion Combining auto refract keratometer with phoroptor makes the optometry more accurate and more dependablely.

关 键 词：临床评价 电脑验光仪 综合验光仪 验光 

分 类 号：R770.43[医药卫生—眼科]