Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic autorefraction with an open-field auto refractor in a school vision screening set up, and to define a threshold for myopia that agrees with the standard cycloplegic refraction threshold. The study was conducted as part of the Sankara Nethralaya Tamil Nadu Essilor Myopia (STEM) study, which investigated the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for myopia among children in South India. Children from two schools aged 5 to 15 years, with no ocular abnormalities and whose parents gave informed consent for cycloplegic refraction were included in the study. All the children underwent visual acuity assessment (Pocket Vision Screener, Elite school of Optometry, India), followed by non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic (1% tropicamide) open-field autorefraction (Grand Seiko, WAM-5500). A total of 387 children were included in the study, of whom 201 were boys. The mean (SD) age of the children was 12.2 (±2.1) years. Overall, the mean difference between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic spherical equivalent (SE) open-field autorefraction measures was 0.34 D (limits of agreement (LOA), 1.06 D to −0.38 D). For myopes, the mean difference between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic SE was 0.13 D (LOA, 0.63D to −0.36D). The prevalence of myopia was 12% (95% CI, 8% to 15%) using the threshold of cycloplegic SE ≤ −0.50 D, and was 14% (95% CI, 11% to 17%) with SE ≤ −0.50 D using non-cycloplegic refraction. When myopia was defined as SE of ≤−0.75 D under non-cycloplegic conditions, there was no difference between cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic open-field autorefraction prevalence estimates (12%; 95% CI, 8% to 15%; p = 1.00). Overall, non-cycloplegic refraction underestimates hyperopia and overestimates myopia; but for subjects with myopia, this difference is minimal and not clinically significant. A threshold of SE ≤ −0.75 D agrees well for the estimation of myopia prevalence among children when using non-cycloplegic refraction and is comparable with the standard definition of cycloplegic myopic refraction of SE ≤ −0.50 D.
Highlights
Uncorrected refractive error remains the second most common cause of visual impairment next to cataract among children [1,2]
Hyperopia accounted for 2% (n = 6) of the total refractive errors
Weeffoouunnddtthhaattaahhigighheerrnnoonn-c-cyyccloloppleleggicicththrereshshooldld(S(SEE≤≤−−0.75 D) tto ddeefifinneemmyyooppiiaa alonngg withh using an open-fifield autoreeffrraaccttoorr iimmpprroovveeddtthhee aaccccuurraaccyyooff myooppiiaa ppreevvaalleennccee estiimmaatteess aannddwwaasscocommpparaarbalbelewwithithcyccylocplolpegleicgircefrreafcrtaicotnio. nP.rePvrieovuisoustsusdtiueds iceosmcpoamripnagricnygcycloplegic and non-cycloplegic refraction estimates have in general found an overestimation of myopia estimates in the absence of cycloplegia [9,10,11,12,28,29,30,31]
Summary
Uncorrected refractive error remains the second most common cause of visual impairment next to cataract among children [1,2]. Uncorrected refractive error among school children can negatively impact vision-related quality of life [2], and early detection and appropriate management is of great importance. This is important as there has been a steady rise in the prevalence of myopia, and it is projected that 50% of the world’s population would be myopic by 2050 [3]. The main reason behind this is the influence of proximal accommodation and ‘instrument myopia’ in closed-field autorefractors [12]. Open-field autorefractors aim to eliminate this proximal accommodation cue by providing a binocular field of view of a distant target, and accommodation control [13]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
