目的：比较自然瞳孔状态下Spot视力筛查仪和自动电脑验光仪测量学龄前儿童屈光结果的差异和相关性。

方法：横断面研究。采用随机方法于2021年10月至2021年11月抽取江阴市某幼儿园大班儿童311名，分别用Spot视力筛查仪与自动电脑验光进行验光检查。通过Thibos矢量分析法将散光分解为J₀和J₄₅，两种仪器测量等效球镜度数、球镜度数、柱镜度数、J₀和J₄₅的差异，采用Spearman行相关分析。

结果：纳入311名儿童中有1名儿童因球镜度数<-7.50 D，超出Spot视力筛查仪检测范围(-7.50-+7.50 D)而予数据剔除，最终共纳入310名儿童，均取右眼数据进行分析。Spot视力筛查仪与自动电脑验光测量等效球镜度数比较无差异(P=0.598)，两种设备测量球镜度数、柱镜度数、J₀、J₄₅比较均有差异(均P<0.001)； 两组仪器所测结果均呈正相关\〖等效球镜度数(r_s=0.350， P<0.001)，球镜度数(r_s=0.403， P<0.001)，柱镜度数(r_s=0.545， P<0.001)，J₀(r_s=0.672， P<0.001)，J₄₅(r_s=0.439， P<0.001)\〗。

结论：Spot视力筛查仪和自动电脑验光仪的检查结果不能相互替代，两种设备在视力筛查中应设置不同转诊指标。

METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from October to November 2021. A total of 311 children from a senior kindergarten in Jiangyin city were randomly selected and underwent refraction test using both Spot vision screener and autorefractor without cycloplegia. The astigmatism was decomposed into J₀ and J₄₅ by the Thibos vector analysis. The differences in spherical equivalence(SE), sphere, cylinder, J₀ and J₄₅ measured by these two devices were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. Spearman analysis was employed to analyze the correlation.

RESULTS:One child was excluded from the initial 311 children due to sphere power <-7.50 D, exceeding the detection range of the Spot vision screener(-7.50 to +7.50 D). A total of 310 children were ultimately included in this study, and the data of right eye of each child were selected. There was no statistically significant difference between the SE measured by the Spot vision screener and the autorefractor(P=0.598), while the difference in sphere, cylinder, J₀, and J₄₅ was statistically significant(all P<0.001). Measurements from these two devices had a positive correlation \〖SE(r_s=0.350, P<0.001), sphere(r_s=0.403, P<0.001), cylinder(r_s=0.545, P<0.001), J₀ (r_s=0.672, P<0.001), J₄₅ (r_s=0.439, P<0.001)\〗.

CONCLUSION:The results of Spot vision screener and autorefractor cannot be replaced by each other, and different referral indicators should be set for these two devices in vision screening.