论文部分内容阅读
目的：:比较Spot双目视力筛查仪和自动电脑验光仪在近视筛查中结果的差异、相关性和一致性。方法：:横断面研究。采用分层随机方法抽取徐州某学校6～19岁的学生共500人，分别用Spot双目视力筛查仪（VS100，美国伟伦公司）和自动电脑验光仪（KR800，日本拓普康公司）进行验光检查。记录睫状肌麻痹（1%复方托吡卡胺眼药水）前后2种设备的验光数据。采用配对n t检验来比较2种仪器所测得的SE值差异，用组内相关检验来比较检测结果的相关性。采用Bland-Altman一致性检验来分析比较结果的一致性。n 结果：:最终纳入498名学生。2种设备在不同程度的近视组中所测得的SE值差异均有统计学意义（n P<0.001）。Spot在近视学生中所得的SE值均较自动验光仪偏正（n P0.8，n P<0.001）。2种设备检查SE结果差值90%的位点位于95%置信区间参考范围内，2种设备检查结果一致性良好。n 结论：:无论是否行睫状肌麻痹，Spot在近视筛查中均有较好的可靠性。“,”Objective::To assess the difference, agreement and relevance for the results of the Spot photoscreener (Welch Allyn, VS100) and auto refractometer (Topcon, KR8800) in detecting myopia in students from a school in Xuzhou, China.Methods::In this cross-sectional study, 500 randomly selected students (500 right eyes) aged from 6 to 19 from a school in Xuzhou were measured in turns by the two autorefractors to obtain their refractive status. 1% tropicamide was used as the cycloplegic refraction drug in 498 students. The spherical equivalences (SE) measured by the two autorefractors were compared by a paired n t test. Agreement of spherical equivalents from the two devices was assessed by Bland-Altman plots. Spearman correlation analysis was also used to compare the measurements from the two devices.n Results::At last, 498 students included. The difference in SE between the two methods was statistically significant (n P<0.001). The SE of the Spot appeared more positive compared to the results of the auto refractometer in myopic students (n P0.8,n P<0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed a good agreement between the results of the two devices.n Conclusions::The Spot photoscreener can give reliable results with or without cycloplegia.