方法：门诊屈光不正的学龄前儿童98例196眼，年龄3～6岁，使用10g/L阿托品眼膏涂眼，2次/d，连用4d，第5d停药后分别使用电脑验光和检影验光，结果进行统计学分析比较。

结果：比较电脑验光和检影验光的结果显示远视球镜均值电脑验光法(2.70±2.75D)所测结果低于检影验光法(2.99±2.09D)，行配对t检验，两种方法结果比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)； 近视球镜均值电脑验光法(-2.74±1.25D)所测结果高于检影验光法(-2.35±2.18D)，结果比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)； 散光轴向两种方法比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)，而散光度数值均值比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论：电脑验光和检影验光法在学龄前儿童散瞳验光应用中各有利弊，临床工作中需结合使用。

METHODS: Ninety-eight preschooler children aged from 3 to 6 years old(196 eyes)of out-patient with abnormal refraction were chosen at random and examined. 10g/L atropine eye ointment was applied twice a day for four days. The fifth day, computer optometry and retinoscopy optometry were used separately. The results of optometry were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS: A comparison of the computer optometry and retinoscopy optometry results showed that: Forhyperopic refraction, the mean spherical equivalent refractions of computer optometry(2.70±2.75D)was less positive values than that of retinoscopy optometry(2.99±2.09 D). A matched-pairs t-test showed that there was a significant difference(P<0.05). For myopic refraction, the mean spherical equivalent refractions of computer optometry(-2.74±1.25D)was more negative values than that of retinoscopy(-2.35±2.18D). There was a significant difference(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the position of astigmatic axis between two methods of measurement(P>0.05). With regard to the astigmatism degree, there existed significant difference between the computer optometry and retinoscopy optometry results(P<0.05).

CONCLUSION: Computer optometry and retinoscopy optometry had their own merits and defects in measurement of objective refraction in preschooler children. They should complement each other to provide accurate evidence for vision correction in clinical work.