Han Susan C, Graham Andrew D, Lin Meng C
Clinical Research Center, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA.
Optom Vis Sci. 2011 Feb;88(2):234-43. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31820846ac.
To determine whether there are significant differences in standard clinical measures of vision, progressive addition lens (PAL)-specific vision tests, or subjective ratings and preferences between customized free-form and standard non-free-form PALs in an experienced wearing population. In addition, we aim to determine whether subjective or objective clinical outcomes depend on demographic, PAL usage, spectacle prescription, or frame fitting characteristics.
In a randomized, double-masked cross-over trial, 95 experienced wearers wore Zeiss Individual customized free-form PAL spectacles (test) and standard non-free-form PAL spectacles (control) for 1 week each. At dispensing and after 1 week of wear, subjects were tested for distance and near visual acuity under both high and low contrast; in addition, 30° off-axis visual acuity was measured using a novel apparatus, as was the horizontal extent of clear, undistorted vision at reading distance. Subjects also completed a set of questionnaires detailing their satisfaction levels, adaptation times, and preferences for test or control spectacles for different visual tasks.
The test spectacles were preferred overall and for distance, midrange, transitional and active vision, and rated higher in overall satisfaction (p = 0.006). There were no clinically important differences between test and control spectacles in standard clinical vision assessments. In the PAL-specific assessments, however, the horizontal extent of clear vision at reading distance was significantly greater with the test spectacles (p = 0.004).
There were statistically significant preferences for the optically customized free-form lenses over the non-free-form lenses. Subjects also reported a wider field of undistorted vision when looking through the reading zone of the test spectacles. Although standard clinical vision assessments are not sufficiently refined to detect important objective differences between the spectacle types, customization taking into account back vertex distance, segment height, pantoscopic tilt, and wrap angle can result in a superior subjective wearing experience for many PAL patients.
确定在有经验的佩戴人群中,定制的自由曲面渐进多焦点镜片(PAL)与标准的非自由曲面PAL在视力的标准临床测量、PAL特定视力测试或主观评分及偏好方面是否存在显著差异。此外,我们旨在确定主观或客观临床结果是否取决于人口统计学因素、PAL使用情况、眼镜处方或镜框适配特征。
在一项随机、双盲交叉试验中,95名有经验的佩戴者分别佩戴蔡司个性化定制自由曲面PAL眼镜(测试组)和标准非自由曲面PAL眼镜(对照组),各佩戴1周。在配镜时以及佩戴1周后,对受试者进行高对比度和低对比度下的远视力和近视力测试;此外,使用一种新型仪器测量30°离轴视力,以及阅读距离处清晰、无变形视力的水平范围。受试者还完成了一组问卷,详细说明他们的满意度、适应时间以及对不同视觉任务下测试或对照眼镜的偏好。
总体而言,测试眼镜在远视力、中距离视力、过渡视力和动态视力方面更受青睐,总体满意度评分更高(p = 0.006)。在标准临床视力评估中,测试眼镜和对照眼镜之间没有临床重要差异。然而,在PAL特定评估中,测试眼镜在阅读距离处的清晰视力水平范围显著更大(p = 0.004)。
在光学定制的自由曲面镜片和非自由曲面镜片之间存在统计学上的显著偏好。受试者还报告称,透过测试眼镜的阅读区域观察时,无变形视野更宽。尽管标准临床视力评估不够精细,无法检测出不同类型眼镜之间的重要客观差异,但考虑后顶点距离、镜片高度、镜面倾斜度和镜腿弯度进行定制,可以为许多PAL患者带来更好的主观佩戴体验。