首页 我的

转载 [文献速递]A超与IOLMaster测量儿童塑形镜配戴者眼轴测量可重复性与准确性评

孟国明 副主任医师 好大夫工作室 眼科
2013-10-16 1153人已读
孟国明 副主任医师
好大夫工作室

013-10-16 毛欣杰  

昨天的文献分享了IOLmaster测量眼轴作为监控近视增加的一种验证手段,解决了大家的一个疑问:塑形镜配戴后中央角膜的变薄和变平坦会不会造成塑形镜对眼轴增长控制的高估?今再介绍篇文章,到底这些眼轴测量的方法在塑形镜配戴后,测量的准确性和重复性可好?哪种更好?好大夫工作室眼科孟国明

 

Clin Exp Optom. 2006 May;89(3):160-8.

Repeatability and agreement of two A-scan ultrasonic biometersand IOLMaster in non-orthokeratology subjects and post-orthokeratologychildren.

超与IOLMaster在测量儿童塑形镜配戴者和未戴者眼轴测量的可重复性与准确性评估

Chan B, Cho P, Cheung SW.

Source

School of Optometry, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hong Kong SAR, China. soben@polyu.edu.hk

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Our aim was to determine the repeatability ofmeasurements of axial length (AL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) made with twoultrasonic biometers and the IOLMaster in a group of non-orthokeratology(ortho-k) adult subjects and to investigate the agreement among instruments inchildren undergoing ortho-k therapy and in children wearing spectacles.

METHODS:

To determine repeatability, AL and ACD were measuredtwice in 22 non-ortho-k young adults using two A-scan ultrasonic biometers(A-5500 and A-2500) and the IOLMaster. To determine agreement, AL and ACD weremeasured with the same instruments in 30 children undergoing ortho-k therapyand 30 spectacle-wearing children.

为评估可重复性, AL 和 ACD 分别用A-scan ultrasonic biometers(A-5500 and A-2500) and the IOLMasterwere三种仪器测量了 22 位未配戴塑形镜的年轻人。为评估准确性,分别用同一仪器测量30位戴塑形镜的儿童和30位戴框架镜的儿童,获得AL 和ACD 值。

RESULTS:

In the adult subjects, there were no significantdifferences in ACD and AL measurements obtained from the three instruments(repeated measures ANOVAs, p > 0.05). There was also no significantbetween-measurement difference for each instrument. The between-measurement agreementwas better for the IOLMaster (95% limits of agreement (LA): -0.04 and +0.05 mmfor both AL and ACD) than for the two A-scan ultrasonic biometers (95% LA:-0.12 and +0.11 mm for AL; -0.22 and +0.27 mm for ACD). Among the children, ALmeasurements with all three instruments were not significantly different fromeach other for both the children undergoing ortho-k therapy and those wearingspectacles (repeated measures ANOVAs, p > 0.05). The 95% LA of differencesobtained from any two instruments were also comparable for both groups ofsubjects (within -0.20 mm and +0.20 mm). ACD measurements of the children weresignificantly different among the three instruments (repeated measures ANOVAs,p < 0.05). No significant differences in ACD measurements were found betweenA-5500 and A-2500 for both groups of children (paired t tests, p > 0.017).

在成年受试者中,三种仪器(ACD和AL测量获得的重复测量的方差分析, P>0.05)无显着差异。每台仪器测量之间也没有显著的差异。测量组间数据吻合度更好的是IOLMaster,( 95 %吻合度区间( LA ):-0.04和+0.05毫米AL和ACD ),比两架A-超( 95 % LA : -0.12 + 0.11毫米AL ; -0.22 0.27毫米的ACD )较好。接受角膜塑形术和戴眼镜的儿童,所有三个仪器测量AL没有显著差异(重复测量的方差分析,P> 0.05 )。任何两种仪器差异的吻合度的95%区间LA在两组受试者之间具有一致性( -0.20毫米和0.20毫米的)。 ACD测量在三种仪器间有明显不同(重复测量的方差分析, P <0.05 )。 ACD测量发现两组儿童(配对t检验, P < 0.017 ), A- 5500和A - 2500之间无显着差异

CONCLUSIONS:

The repeatability of AL and ACD measurements with theIOLMaster was very good, and was better than with the A-scan ultrasonicbiometers. The agreements in AL measurements between A-scan ultrasonicbiometers and IOLMaster were comparable in both the ortho-k and thespectacle-wearing subjects, and were comparable to the repeatability of the A-scanultrasonic biometers. ACD measurements between A-scan ultrasonic biometry andthe IOLMaster were not comparable. AL measurements with the IOLMaster canreplace the measurements from the two A-scan ultrasonic biometers used,however, the reverse is not true. AL and ACD measurements with all threeinstruments were unaffected by the flattened cornea following ortho-k lenswear.

IOLMaster测量AL和ACD测量的重复性非常好,并比更A超好。在AL测量方面,A超和IOLMaster测量对角膜塑形镜配戴和配戴眼镜两组准确性保持一致,在重复性测量上也一致。媲美。在ACD测量上 A超和IOLMaster测量之间并不一致。IOLMaster测量AL可以替代A-超的使用,但是,相反的A-超不能代替IOLMaster。 AL和ACD测量所有三个仪器测量均不受角膜塑形镜配戴后角膜变平因素的影响。

本文为转载文章,如有侵权请联系作者删除。

有帮助
期待更新

孟国明 副主任医师

好大夫工作室 眼科

问医生 去挂号

更多文章

[文献速递]A超与IO... 的相关咨询
由于相关规范,IOS用户暂不可在小程序订阅