Bakaraju Ravi C, Tilia Daniel, Sha Jennifer, Diec Jennie, Chung Jiyoon, Kho Danny, Delaney Shona, Munro Anna, Thomas Varghese
Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, Australia; School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, Australia; School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
J Optom. 2018 Jan-Mar;11(1):21-32. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2017.04.001. Epub 2017 Jun 12.
To compare the visual performance of prototype contact lenses designed via deliberate manipulation of higher-order spherical aberrations to extend-depth-of-focus with two commercial multifocals, after 1 week of lens wear.
In a prospective, participant-masked, cross-over, randomized, 1-week dispensing clinical-trial, 43 presbyopes [age: 42-63 years] each wore AIROPTIX Aqua multifocal (AOMF), ACUVUE OASYS for presbyopia (AOP) and extended-depth-of-focus prototypes (EDOF) appropriate to their add requirements. Measurements comprised high-contrast-visual-acuity (HCVA) at 6m, 70cm, 50cm and 40cm; low-contrast-visual-acuity (LCVA) and contrast-sensitivity (CS) at 6m and stereopsis at 40cm. A self-administered questionnaire on a numeric-rating-scale (1-10) assessed subjective visual performance comprising clarity-of-vision and lack-of-ghosting at various distances during day/night-viewing conditions and overall-vision-satisfaction.
EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for HCVA averaged across distances (p≤0.038); significantly worse than AOMF for LCVA (p=0.021) and significantly worse than AOMF for CS in medium and high add-groups (p=0.006). None of these differences were clinically significant (≤2 letters). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for mean stereoacuity (36 and 13 seconds-of-arc, respectively: p≤0.05). For clarity-of-vision, EDOF was significantly better than AOP at all distances and AOMF at intermediate and near (p≤0.028). For lack-of-ghosting averaged across distances, EDOF was significantly better than AOP (p<0.001) but not AOMF (p=0.186). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for overall-vision-satisfaction (p≤0.024).
EDOF provides better intermediate and near vision performance than either AOMF or AOP with no difference for distance vision after 1 week of lens wear.
比较通过有意操控高阶球差设计的原型隐形眼镜(以扩展焦深)与两款市售多焦点隐形眼镜在佩戴1周后的视觉性能。
在一项前瞻性、参与者掩蔽、交叉、随机、为期1周的配适临床试验中,43名老花眼患者(年龄42 - 63岁)分别佩戴符合其附加光度需求的AIROPTIX Aqua多焦点隐形眼镜(AOMF)、ACUVUE OASYS老视专用隐形眼镜(AOP)和扩展焦深原型隐形眼镜(EDOF)。测量内容包括6米、70厘米、50厘米和40厘米处的高对比度视力(HCVA);6米处的低对比度视力(LCVA)和对比敏感度(CS)以及40厘米处的立体视。一份采用数字评分量表(1 - 10)的自我管理问卷评估主观视觉性能,包括在白天/夜间观看条件下不同距离的视觉清晰度和无重影情况以及总体视觉满意度。
EDOF在各距离平均HCVA方面显著优于AOMF和AOP(p≤0.038);在LCVA方面显著差于AOMF(p = 0.021),在中高附加光度组的CS方面显著差于AOMF(p = 0.006)。这些差异均无临床显著性(≤2个字母)。EDOF在平均立体视方面显著优于AOMF和AOP(分别为36和13角秒:p≤0.05)。在视觉清晰度方面,EDOF在所有距离均显著优于AOP,在中距离和近距离显著优于AOMF(p≤0.028)。在各距离平均无重影方面,EDOF显著优于AOP(p<0.001)但不优于AOMF(p = 0.186)。EDOF在总体视觉满意度方面显著优于AOMF和AOP(p≤0.024)。
佩戴隐形眼镜1周后,EDOF在中距离和近距离视觉性能方面优于AOMF或AOP,在远距离视觉方面无差异。