PURPOSE: To test the accuracy and reliability of the first-generation prototype of Tracey-1, a ray-tracing refractometer. SETTING: Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. METHODS: The refractive spherical equivalent (SE) and astigmatism measured by Tracey-1, subjective manifest refraction (MR), and autorefraction (AR) (Nidek AR-3300) were compared in 58 pseudophakic eyes of 44 patients with a mean age of 69.95 years +/- 8.6 (SD). The astigmatic values obtained from Tracey-1 and computerized videokeratography were also compared. Astigmatism values were compared using power vector analysis. RESULTS: The mean SEs measured by MR, Tracey, and AR were -0.76 diopter (D) +/- 0.96 (SD) (range 1.00 to -3.00 D), 0.37 +/- 0.64 D (range 1.68 to -1.49 D), and -0.44 +/- 1.13 D (range 1.63 to -3.50 D), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between MR and Tracey values and between MR and AR values were high (r = 0.895 and r = 0.875, respectively; both P < .0001). However, the mean difference between the Tracey and MR values was 1.13 +/- 0.48 D (range 2.45 to -0.06 D) (P < .001). The mean cylindrical differences between MR and Tracey and between MR and AR were 0.03 +/- 0.51 D (range 1.22 to -1.07 D) (P = .709) and -0.30 +/- 0.62 D (range 0.50 to -2.25 D) (P = .003), respectively. Power vector analysis revealed difference vectors of -0.16 x 60 between Tracey and MR and -0.22 x 87 between AR and MR. CONCLUSIONS: Spherical and cylindrical refractive data obtained with the Tracey system correlated well with those derived from MR; however, there was a mean spherical error of approximately 1.10 D. Further work is required to refine the accuracy and range of this device.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: