This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

Higher Order Aberrations in Normal Eyes Measured With Three Different Aberrometers

Add topic to email alerts

Receive an email when new articles are posted on

Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on .

Subscribe

Added to email alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

Back to Healio

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Back to Healio

PURPOSE

To assess the repeatability of measurements of higher order aberrations using three different aberrometers and to compare higher order aberration measurements between optical path difference (OPD) scanning and the Hartmann-Shack method.

METHODS

Wavefront aberration data obtained using the NIDEK OPD-Scan, Bausch & Lomb Zywave wavefront aberrometer, and VISX CustomVue wavefront analyzer were compared. A total of 19 subjects were included in the study. The repeatability in each machine was assessed by calculating the difference between measurements and the mean of three consecutive measurements in the same eye. Subsequent analysis of the distribution of these differences yields the mean difference, the standard deviation of the differences, and the 95% confidence interval for repeated measurements, also termed the “repeatability coefficient.”

RESULTS

Repeatability errors in all three machines were found to be low, suggesting that all three machines are reliable in their repeated measurements. Significant differences were demonstrated between OPD scanning and Hartmann-Shack aberrometers. All three machines showed statistically significant differences in several higher order aberration parameters when compared to each other.

CONCLUSIONS

The three different aberrometers provided repeatable measurements but statistical differences were noted in the measurement of higher order aberrations when comparing the machines. No instrument was superior over the other and all three were reliable. [J Refract Surg. 2006;22:898-903.]

AUTHORS

From the Department of Ophthalmology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY.

The authors have no financial interest in the materials presented herein.

Correspondence: Ahmet Z. Burakgazi, MD, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, One Gustave L. Levy Place, New York, NY 10029. Tel: 212.241.8823; Fax: 212.289.5945; E-mail: drburakgazi@yahoo.com

Received: July 29, 2005

Accepted: April 11, 2006

Posted online: August 31, 2006