| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2015 | Volume
: 3
| Issue : 2 | Page : 77-79 |
|
|
Is post mydriatic test necessary in children having compound myopic astigmatism?
Mihir Kothari1, Ali Hussain2
1 Department of Pediatric Ophthalmology of Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital Private Limited, Wadala; Bombay City Eye Institute and Research Centre, Mumbai; Jyotirmay Eye Clinic, Thane, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Pediatric Ophthalmology of Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital Private Limited, Wadala, Mumbai, India
Correspondence Address:
Mihir Kothari
Director, Jyotirmay Eye Clinic and Pediatric Low Vision Center, 205 Ganatra Estate, Next to Punjani Indu. Estate, Pokhran Road No 1, Thane West - 400 601, Maharashtra
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/2320-3897.156587
|
|
|
Purpose: To study the need of post mydriatic test (PMT) in children with mild to moderate compound myopic astigmatism. Materials and Methods: The children having mild to moderate compound myopic astigmatism presenting to the pediatric ophthalmology department underwent subjective refraction before, immediately after cycloplegia and 3 days after cycloplegia. The refractive error was analyzed using two-tailed paired t test by dividing the refractive-errors into sphere, cylinder and axis. Spherical equivalent was analyzed separately. Result: Eighty four eyes of 42 children aged 3 to16 years (Mean 9.6, SD 3.2) were included. Mean sphere was -0.9 diopter sphere (DS) (± 1.9) without cycloplegia and -0.4 DS (± 2.0) with cycloplegia compared to -0.9 DS (± 1.8) in the PMT. Mean cylinder was -1.3 diopter cylinder (DC) (± 1.2) without cycloplegia and -1.0 DC (± 1.5) with cycloplegia compared to -1.14 DC (± 1.3) in PMT. Mean spherical equivalent was -1.5 DS (± 1.6) without cycloplegia and -0.9 DS (± 1.8) with cycloplegia compared to -1.5 DS (± 1.6) in PMT. For spherical equivalent, the correlation coefficient (r) between non-cycloplegic refraction and cycloplegic refraction; non-cycloplegic refraction and PMT; cycloplegic refraction and PMT was 0.9. However, in comparison to cycloplegic refraction, PMT was closer to non-cycloplegic refraction and differed by only 0.01 DS (± 0.9) in sphere and 0.2 D (± 0.7) in cylinder. Conclusion: PMT is not warranted in children with compound myopic astigmatism. |
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
