摘要
目的了解电脑验光与综合验光测量结果的一致性。方法被检者年龄7～22岁,分别经电脑验光、综合验光仪验光,比较两者球镜度数、柱镜度数及散光轴向。结果电脑验光与综合验光相比,两者的球镜度数在高度远视及中度近视时的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),柱镜度数在高度近视时差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),散光轴向在低度近视及低度远视时差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论电脑验光虽具有快速验光的特点,但仍不可以代替综合验光,不能作为最终配镜的处方。(中国眼耳鼻喉科杂志,2007,7:35～36)
Purpose To observe the consistence in results between autorefraction and subjective referaction. Methods Subjects aged 7-22 years were performed optometry with autorefraction and subjective refrection. Comparisions of spherical lens dioptre, cylinder dioptre and astigmatic axis obtained with the two methods were made. Results Significant difference in spherical lens dioptre （ P 〈 0.05） was found in high hyperopia and middle myopia subjects. And in high myopia, significant difference in cylinder dioptre was identified （P 〈 0.05）. Significant difference in the length of astigmatic axis existed in low myopia and hyperopia（ P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Although autorefraction has advantage of quick optometry, it cannot take over subjective refraction. The examined results with autorefraction cannot be used as last prescription for refraction. （ Chin J Ophthalmol and Otorhinolaryngol, 2007,7 ： 35-36）
出处
《中国眼耳鼻喉科杂志》
2007年第1期35-36,共2页
Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology
关键词
电脑验光
综合验光
度数
autorefraction
subjective refraction
dioptre
