Visual performance with simultaneous vision multifocal contact lenses

Llorente-Guillemot, Almudena; García‐Lázaro, Santiago; Ferrer-Blasco, Teresa; Pérez-Cambrodí, Rafael J.; Cerviño, Alejandro

doi:10.1111/j.1444-0938.2011.00666.x

Cited by 49 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, variability in stereopsis measurements for multifocal lenses has been previously reported (15,20,21) . In this study, HCVA at near distances that were recorded with all lenses were lower than pre viously reported values (15,(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25) , which is primarily attributable to the difference in methodology. Unlike other studies, we sought to measure the smallest paragraph that patients could "comfortably" read, which involved an additional subjective element in the objective resolution task.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

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

Sha¹,

Bakaraju²,

Tilia³

et al. 2016

Arquivos Brasileiros De Oftalmologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

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

Sha¹,

Bakaraju²,

Tilia³

et al. 2016

Arquivos Brasileiros De Oftalmologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12,16,17 A plausible reason for this degradation of the SIMCL regarding the monofocal contact lenses is that the pupil size increases under dim light levels, and bearing in mind that the refractive power changes into the plus or minus away from the center of the lens in SIMCL, the distance and near portions determine the effective power of the lens for distance, [18][19][20][21][22][23] and therefore visual performance. At mesopic level without glare, among the SIMCLs, it was AOAM and PM that provided the best visual acuity (about 20/25) with no significant differences between the 2 modalities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26,27 This, added to the fact that the pupil dilates under dim light levels and that SIMCL designs increase light scatter, 16 may explain this impairment. These visual acuity values make it more difficult to perform distant-vision tasks under mesopic conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Performance of Four Simultaneous-Image Multifocal Contact Lenses Under Dim and Glare Conditions

García‐Lázaro

Ferrer-Blasco

Madrid-Costa

et al. 2015

Eye &Amp; Contact Lens: Science &Amp; Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, previous multifocal contact lens research has focused on comparing monovision contact lens correction with a single presbyopic contact lens design, 2,3 examined limited numbers of participants, 4,5 assessed the lenses after a suboptimal adaptation period, 6,7 or has used limited visual performance metrics to compare differences between lens designs (Table 1). 19,22 In addition, the impact the lenses have on ocular physiology (such as hyperemia and corneal staining) has not been assessed hitherto.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%