Accuracy of WASCA aberrometer refraction compared to manifest refraction in Chinese adult myopes.

PURPOSE To investigate the accuracy of the Carl Zeiss Meditec Wavefront Supported Custom Ablation (WASCA) aberrometer in refraction testing for Chinese myopic adults. METHODS Manifest refraction and WASCA were performed on 360 eyes of 360 consecutive Chinese myopic adults without cycloplegia. Both vector analysis and conventional notation were applied for comparing results, and differences between WASCA and manifest refraction for each component were calculated for accuracy evaluation. Correlation coefficients, regression equations, and mean errors of each component between the two methods were also tested. RESULTS Pearson correlation coefficient for M, J(0), J(45), sphere, and cylinder was 0.9680, 0.9320, 0.8655, 0.9668, and 0.8761, respectively. Mean error for the components above was -0.39+/-0.71 diopters (D), -0.02+/-0.16 D, 0.01+/-0.12 D, -0.42+/-0.70 D, and 0.06+/-0.30 D, respectively. In patients whose manifest vector M was < or =-6.00 D, mean errors of sphere and vector M were larger than the remainder of the study group. Ninety percent cylinder errors were within +/-0.50 D. Mean error of axis was 7.4 degrees, with 50% of eyes within 5 degrees. In cases with < or =-0.75 D astigmatism, mean error of axis was 9.8 degrees, which was larger than the remainder of the study group by 4.9 degrees. CONCLUSIONS For Chinese myopic adults, the concordance between WASCA and manifest refraction is, on average, high. However, for eyes with low to moderate spherocylindrical refraction, WASCA is less accurate in predicting sphere and vector M. It is also less effective for the measurement of axis in patients with astigmatism <0.75 D.

[1]  I. Bahar,et al.  Wavefront-guided LASIK for myopia with the Technolas 217z: results at 3 years. , 2007, Journal of refractive surgery.

[2]  D. R. Iskander,et al.  Potential Higher-Order Aberration Cues for Sphero-Cylindrical Refractive Error Development , 2007, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[3]  B. Gilmartin,et al.  Wavefront analyzers induce instrument myopia. , 2006, Journal of refractive surgery.

[4]  D. Reinstein,et al.  Accuracy of the WASCA aberrometer refraction compared to manifest refraction in myopia. , 2006, Journal of refractive surgery.

[5]  Jason E Stahl,et al.  Ocular cyclotorsion during customized laser ablation. , 2005, Journal of refractive surgery.

[6]  A. Bradley,et al.  Predicting subjective judgment of best focus with objective image quality metrics. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[7]  A. Bradley,et al.  Accuracy and precision of objective refraction from wavefront aberrations. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[8]  Thomas Kohnen,et al.  In vivo and in vitro repeatability of Hartmann‐Shack aberrometry , 2003, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[9]  R. West,et al.  Measurement of Refractive Errors in Young Myopes Using the COAS Shack-Hartmann Aberrometer , 2003, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[10]  Z. Nagy,et al.  Wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy for myopia and myopic astigmatism. , 2002, Journal of refractive surgery.

[11]  S. Panagopoulou,et al.  Wavefront customized ablations with the WASCA Asclepion workstation. , 2001, Journal of refractive surgery.

[12]  L. Thibos,et al.  Power vector analysis of the optical outcome of refractive surgery , 2001, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.