Suhas Shamrao Sarawade, Akshata Bhalchandra Mankari
BACKGROUND Retinoscopy helps in accurate measurements of accommodative response, while an autorefractometer can only help in predicting the accommodative system activation especially in children in whom accommodation is very active. It is of utmost importance to understand as to which of the two methods of objective correction is better accepted by the patients. We wanted to compare the accuracy of retinoscopy and autorefraction in acceptance of subjective correction. METHODS A total of 250 patients in the age group of 10-40 years, with refractive errors were studied by streak retinoscopy and auto refractometer. These tests were followed by subjective refraction or post mydriatic test as applicable, both monocular as well as binocular, until best corrected visual acuity was achieved. RESULTS The spherical power estimated by retinoscopy and AR was accepted by 87.6% and 43.4% of the eyes respectively while 12.4% and 56.6% of the eyes respectively didn’t accept it. The cylindrical power on the other hand, as estimated by retinoscopy and AR was accepted by 57% and 78.6% of the eyes respectively. The axis on retinoscopy and AR was accepted by 60.6% and 72.8% of the eyes respectively. CONCLUSIONS Retinoscopy is a reliable starting point for refraction; however, autorefraction values are important in order to accurately prescribe cylindrical correction.
