논문 상세보기
pp.163-172
Purpose : Many methods of residual astigmatism measurement are available clinically. In this study, residual astigmatism was examined and compared various tests of residual astigmatism measurement. Method : Subjects(54 males, 53 females) without ocular pathology and ocular surgical history were recruited from the college students. Noncycloplegic subjective and objective refraction were performed. And after wearing RGP lenses, objective refraction were performed. Result : The means Jo and J4s components of total astigmatism were +0.26±0.38D and -0.01±0.14D with subjective refraction. +0.29±0.39D and -0.03±0.17D with objective refraction and +0.34±0.51D and - 0.28±0.22D with Javal's rule, respectively, There was significantly difference in three methods measuring total astigmatism(p(O. 05) . Measuring the residual astigmatism with difference between total astigmatism and corneal astigmatism, the means Jo and J4s components of residual astigmatism were - 0.21±0.28D and +0.21±0.18D with subjective refraction, -0.17±0.32D and +0.20±0.17D with objective refraction, -0.13±0.10D and - 0.06± 0.04D with Javal's rule. and there was significantly difference(p(0.05). The means Jo and J4s components of residual astigmatism were - 0.18±0.25D and +0.20±0.16D with rest values reported auto- refractor and - 0,14±0.24D and - 0.06±0,17D after wearing RGP contact lenses. Conclusion : There were individual differences in means and standard deviations of residual astigmatism in each method. Therefore, it is important to consider residual astigmatism with total astigmatism and corneal astigmatism in clinic.
