Short-term visual performance of soft multifocal contact lenses for presbyopia

Abstract

Purpose: To compare visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity, stereopsis, and subjective visual performance of Acuvue® Oasys® for Presbyopia (AOP), Air Optix® Aqua Multifocal (AOMF), and Air Optix® Aqua Single Vision (AOSV) lenses in patients with presbyopia. Methods: A single-blinded crossover trial was conducted. Twenty patients with mild presbyopia (add ≤+1.25 D) and 22 with moderate/severe presbyopia (add ≥+1.50 D) who wore lenses bilaterally for 1 h, with a minimum overnight washout period between the use of each lens. Measurements included high-and low-contrast visual acuity (HCVA and LCVA, respectively) at a distance, contrast sensitivity (CS) at a distance, HCVA at intermediate (70 cm) and near (50 cm & 40 cm) distances, stereopsis, and subjective questionnaires regarding vision clarity, ghosting, overall vision satisfaction, and comfort. The test variables were compared among the lens types using repeated-measures ANOVA. Results: Distance variables (HCVA, LCVA, and CS) were significantly worse with multifocal lens than with AOSV lens (p≤0.008), except for AOMF lens in the mild presbyopia group in which no significant difference was observed (p>0.05). Multifocal lenses had significantly greater HCVA at 40 cm than AOSV lens (p≤0.026). AOMF lens had greater intermediate HCVA than AOP lens (p<0.03). AOP lens de monstrated greater improvements in stereopsis than AOMF and AOSV lens in the moderate/severe presbyopia group (p≤0.03). Few significant differences in subjective variables were observed, with no significant difference in the overall vision satisfaction observed between lens types (p>0.05). The proportions of patients willing to buy AOSV, AOMF, and AOP lenses were 20%, 40%, and 50%, respectively, in the mild presbyopia group and 14%, 32%, and 23%, respectively, in the moderate/severe presbyopia group; however, these differences were not sta tistically significant (p≥0.159). Conclusions: Further development of multifocal lenses is required before significant advantages of multifocal lenses over single vision lens are observed in pa tients with presbyopia.

Power Profiles of Commercial Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses

“…By the nature of their design, the ACUVUE OASYS for PRESBYOPIA ring design has large abrupt steps with sharp transition zones, which could be responsible for the often reported significant levels of ghosting associated with these lenses. 28 The two steps in the power profiles of the PureVision2 for Presbyopia and Biotrue ONEday for Presbyopia lenses form three distinct power rings, effectively creating a trifocal lens design. The plateaus between the stair-cased reduction of power in the Clariti 1 day lenses are probably too narrow to provide any functional focusing.…”

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

“…While both objective (Anderson and Stuebing, 2014;Leon et al, 2016) and subjective measures (Cobb, 1964;Donders, 1865;Turner, 1958) of accommodation indicate that to the accommodative response starts to decrease in the early teens, there is only a concurrent drop in accommodative gain by the fifth decade, reducing near image quality and resulting in the apparent acceleration of symptoms in early presbyopes (Almutairi et al, 2017). Presbyopia has even been described as causing the loss of accommodation (Sha et al, 2016).…”

Visual quality of juvenile myopes wearing multifocal soft contact lenses

“…MFSCLs are used for correction of presbyopia [27,28] to obtain good vision at all distances. However, some studies [29] suggested that wearing MFSCLs may lead to adverse effects on visual quality and disturbing visual symptoms such as halo and glare, especially at night when the pupils are larger.…”