Clinical comparison of 6 aberrometers. Part 1: Technical specifications
Accepted 12 November 2004.
Purpose
To provide a detailed assessment of the techniques, technical features, and practical use of 6 aberrometers made available to our institution from September 2002 to January 2004.
Setting
Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Methods
A number of technical and practical parameters are listed for the Visual Function Analyzer (Tracey), the OPD-scan (ARK 10000; Nidek), the Zywave (Bausch & Lomb), the WASCA (Carl Zeiss Meditec), the MultiSpot Hartmann-Shack device, and the Allegretto Wave Analyzer including working principles, data acquisition, aberrometer alignment, wavefront calculation, and data analysis. Operator and patient comfort as well as practical advantages and disadvantages are discussed.
Conclusion
All devices met at least half the following parameters: alignment, correction for source wavelength, data averaging, measurement quality check, and inhibition of accommodation.
From the Vision Lab (J.J.R., D.E.M.V.D.) and Department of Ophthalmology (J.J.R., M.-J.T.), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
Reprint requests to Jos J. Rozema, MSc, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650 Edegem, Belgium.
Sponsored by an ESCRS grant (2002) and a 2002 grant of the Belgian Fund for Research in Ophthalmology (2002).
No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
The authors thank the companies—Nidek, Bausch & Lomb, Zeiss, WaveLight, and Tracey—and their Belgian representatives for temporarily providing their aberrometers for their study. The authors thank Michael Mrochen for the lending of the MultiSpot aberrometer and Andrei Larichev and Nikita Irochnikov for providing the necessary technical assistance.
ABSTRACT