Search Results

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the refractive prediction error of Hill-radial basis function 3.0 with those of 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in eyes with short axial lengths.
METHODS: The refractive prediction error was calculated using 4 formulas (Hoffer Q, SRK-T, Haigis, and Hill-RBF) and 11 combination methods (average of two or more methods). The absolute error was determined, and the proportion of eyes within 0.25-diopter (D) increments of absolute error was analyzed. Furthermore, the intraclass correlation coefficients of each method were computed to evaluate the agreement between target refractive error and postoperative spherical equivalent.
RESULTS: This study included 87 eyes. Based on the refractive prediction error findings, Hoffer Q formula exhibited the highest myopic errors, followed by SRK-T, Hill-RBF, and Haigis. Among all the methods, the Haigis and Hill-RBF combination yielded a mean refractive prediction error closest to zero. The SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination showed the lowest mean absolute error, whereas the Hoffer Q, SRK-T, and Haigis combination had the lowest median absolute error. Hill-radial basis function exhibited the highest intraclass correlation coefficient, whereas SRK-T showed the lowest. Haigis and Hill-RBF, as well as the combination of both, demonstrated the lowest proportion of refractive surprises (absolute error >1.00 D). Among the individual formulas, Hill-RBF had the highest success rate (absolute error ≤0.50 D). Moreover, among all the methods, the SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination exhibited the highest success rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Hill-radial basis function showed accuracy comparable to or surpassing that of conventional formulas in eyes with short axial lengths. The use and integration of various formulas in cataract surgery for eyes with short axial lengths may help reduce the incidence of refractive surprises.

Keywords: Cataract; Lenses, intraocular; Axial length, eye; Refractive errors; Artificial intelligence