Development of a questionnaire to assess the relative subjective benefits of presbyopia correction

Buckhurst, Phillip J; Wolffsohn, James S.; Gupta, Navneet; Naroo, Shehzad A.; Davies, Leon N.; Shah, Sunil

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.07.032

Cited by 61 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Standardised vision-related questionnaires generally include few items to assess near visual activities, concentrate on spectacle dependence only, are targeted to measure another aspect of vision (McAlinden et al, 2010), or have not been appropriately validated (Alio and Mulet, 2005;Alio et al, 2004;Bakaraju et al, 2018;Diec et al, 2017;Kohnen et al, 2017;Walkow et al, 1997;Wang et al, 2005). There is only one validated questionnaire available which specifically assesses near visual ability (Buckhurst et al, 2012a) and this is being updated to make it relevant to modern intermediate and near vision tasks such as smartphone and tablet use.…”

Section: 4mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

Self Cite

217

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presbyopia is a global problem affecting over a billion people worldwide. The prevalence of unmanaged presbyopia is as high as 50% of those over 50 years of age in developing world populations, due to a lack of awareness and accessibility to affordable treatment, and is even as high as 34% in developed countries. Definitions of presbyopia are inconsistent and varied, so we propose a redefinition that states "presbyopia occurs when the physiologically normal age-related reduction in the eye's focusing range reaches a point, when optimally corrected for distance vision, that the clarity of vision at near is insufficient to satisfy an individual's requirements". Strategies for correcting presbyopia include separate optical devices located in front of the visual system (reading glasses) or a change in the direction of gaze to view through optical zones of different optical powers (bifocal, trifocal or progressive addition spectacle lenses), monovision (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses, laser refractive surgery and corneal collagen shrinkage), simultaneous images (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses and corneal inlays), pinhole depth of focus expansion (with intraocular lenses, corneal inlays and pharmaceuticals), crystalline lens softening (with lasers or pharmaceuticals) or restored dynamics (with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses, scleral expansion techniques and ciliary muscle electrostimulation); these strategies may be applied differently to the two eyes to optimise the range of clear focus for an individual's task requirements and minimise adverse visual effects. However, none fully overcome presbyopia in all patients. While the restoration of natural accommodation or an equivalent remains elusive, guidance is given on presbyopic correction evaluation techniques.

show abstract

Section: 4mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

Self Cite

217

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…28 Critical print size (CPS) was derived from the reading speed data as the acuity at which the reading speed dropped below the 95% confidence interval. Subjective evaluation of near visual ability was assessed with the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ), 29 and participants rated their quality of vision on a 10-point scale (10 being excellent) when viewing an iPhone 4S held at their habitual working distance under 85 cd/m 2 lighting conditions. Binocular defocus curves were measured over the range of +1.50 to j5.00DS in 0.50DS steps with randomized letter sequences and lens presentation.…”

Section: Assessment Of Optics Visual Function and Ocular Physiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized Crossover Trial of Silicone Hydrogel Presbyopic Contact Lenses

Sivardeen

Laughton

Wolffsohn

2016

Optometry and Vision Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…27 In the present study subjective satisfaction was measured with a single items (Q3.2); however many specific instruments have been tailored and are available to measure particular aspect of satisfaction such as the Near Activity Vision Questionnaire that specifically assess quality of vision at near in presbyopes. [46][47] Furthermore, two main aspects of the patient's subjective experience seem importance to monitor, namely the distance visual performance (Q3.3) and the visual contrast (Q3.6). There is strong evidence that objective visual performance at distance can be reduced in multifocal CLs whilst contrast sensitivity can be reduced both with monovision and multifocal CLs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%