- 作者：Charlotte E. Joslin ; James Koster and Elmer Y. Tu
- 刊名：Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
- 出版年：2005
- 出版时间：December 2005
- 年：2005
- 卷：31
- 期：12
- 页码：2287-2292
- 全文大小：135 K
Purpose
To evaluate the accuracy and precision of the contact lens overrefraction (CLO) method in determining corneal refractive power in post-refractive-surgery eyes.Setting
Refractive Surgery Service and Contact Lens Service, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Methods
Fourteen eyes of 7 subjects who had a single myopic laser in situ keratomileusis procedure within 12 months with refractive stability were included in this prospective case series. The CLO method was compared with the historical method of predicting the corneal power using 4 different lens fitting strategies and 3 refractive pupil scan sizes (3 mm, 5 mm, and total pupil). Rigid lenses included 3 9.0 mm overall diameter lenses fit flat, steep, and an average of the 2, and a 15.0 mm diameter lens steep fit. Cycloplegic CLO was performed using the autorefractor function of the Nidek OPD-Scan ARK-10000. Results with each strategy were compared with the corneal power estimated with the historical method. The bias (mean of the difference), 95 % limits of agreement, and difference versus mean plots for each strategy are presented.
Results
In each subject, the CLO-estimated corneal power varied based on lens fit. On average, the bias between CLO and historical methods ranged from −0.38 to +2.42 diopters (D) and was significantly different from 0 in all but 3 strategies. Substantial variability in precision existed between fitting strategies, with the range of the 95 % limits of agreement approximating 0.50 D in 2 strategies and 2.59 D in the worst-case scenario. The least precise fitting strategy was use of flat-fitting 9.0 mm diameter lenses.
Conclusions
The accuracy and precision of the CLO method of estimating corneal power in post-refractive-surgery eyes was highly variable on the basis of how rigid lense were fit. One of the most commonly used fitting strategies in clinical practice—flat-fitting a 9.0 diameter lens—resulted in the poorest accuracy and precision. Results also suggest use of large-diameter lenses may improve outcomes.