↓ Skip to main content

The effect of ocular biometric factors on the accuracy of various IOL power calculation formulas

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of ocular biometric factors on the accuracy of various IOL power calculation formulas
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12886-017-0454-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jinho Jeong, Han Song, Jimmy K. Lee, Roy S. Chuck, Ji-Won Kwon

Abstract

To evaluate how differences in ocular biometry affects the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T, and Haigis intraocular lens power calculation formulae predictions. This study was performed on 91 eyes of 91 patients who underwent uneventful cataract surgery. Ocular biometry values were measured using the IOL Master 500, and intraocular lens (IOL) power was calculated using the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. We calculated the expected difference (ED) of each 3rd generation formula from the Haigis formula by subtracting the predicted refraction of the Haigis formula from the predicted refraction of each 3rd generation formula. Post-operative anterior chamber depth (ACD) was measured at 1 month after surgery using the IOL master. We calculated errors of each formula by subtracting predicted from manifest refraction at post-operative 1 month. Correlation analysis was performed between ocular biometry values, formula expectation values, formula errors and absolute formula errors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that preoperative ACD was the only significant factor for ED prediction in all of the 3rd generation formulas. For mean errors, axial length and post-operative 1-month change of ACD (delta ACD) correlated significantly with the errors in all 3rd generation formulas, but not with errors of the Haigis formula. Median absolute error (MedAE) of the formulas were 0.40 D for the Hoffer Q formula, 0.37 D for the Holladay formula, 0.34 D for the SRK/T formula, and 0.41 D for the Haigis formula. The MAE of the formulas were 0.50 ± 0.47 D for the Hoffer Q formula, 0.50 ± 0.50 D for the Holladay formula, 0.47 ± 0.51 D for the SRK/T formula, and 0.50 ± 0.47 D for the Haigis formula. Regarding ED between the third generation and Haigis formulas, preoperative ACD demonstrated the greatest influence. Calculating mean absolute errors of the formulas, all IOL formulas showed excellent and comparable accuracy. Post-operative change (delta) of ACD correlated significantly with errors of third generation formulas according to simulated ACD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 9 14%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 24 37%