Visual Performance of Center-distance Multifocal Contact Lenses Fit Using a Myopia Control Paradigm
| Autor: | Augustine N Nti, Hannah R Gregory, Eric R Ritchey, James S. Wolffsohn, David A. Berntsen |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
genetic structures Mesopic vision business.industry Extramural media_common.quotation_subject Significant difference Glare (vision) Article Contact lens 03 medical and health sciences Ophthalmology Ocular physiology 0302 clinical medicine Prosthesis fitting 030221 ophthalmology & optometry medicine Contrast (vision) business 030217 neurology & neurosurgery Optometry media_common |
| Zdroj: | Optom Vis Sci |
| ISSN: | 1040-5488 |
| Popis: | SIGNIFICANCE. With multifocal contact lenses (MFCLs) used for myopia control, questions remain regarding visual performance. Information from non-presbyopic patients provides insight on how MFCLs affect visual acuity and reading performance. PURPOSE. To examine the visual performance of center-distance multifocal contact lenses in non-presbyopic adults under different illumination and contrast conditions compared to a single vision contact lens (SVCL). METHODS. Twenty-five adult subjects were fit with three different lenses (CooperVision Biofinity “D” MFCL +2.50 add, Visioneering Technologies NaturalVue MFCL, CooperVision Biofinity sphere). Acuity and reading performance were evaluated. RESULTS. A statistically significant difference in high-contrast distance acuity was observed (Biofinity –0.18 ± 0.06, Biofinity MFCL –0.14 ± 0.08, NaturalVue MFCL –0.15 ± 0.03; RM-ANOVA P = .017). Under mesopic, high-contrast conditions, MFCLs performed worse than SVCLs (Biofinity –0.05 ± 0.091, Biofinity MFCL +0.03 ± 0.09, NaturalVue MFCL: +0.05 ± 0.091; RM-ANOVA P < .0001). Under low-contrast conditions, MFCLs performed one line worse in photopic lighting and two lines worse under mesopic conditions (RM-ANOVA P < .0001). Glare reduced acuity by 0.5 logMAR for all lenses (RM-ANOVA P < .001). A statistically significant difference in near acuity was observed (RM-ANOVA P = .019), but all lenses achieved acuity better than –0.1 logMAR (Biofinity –0.16 ± 0.06, Biofinity MFCL –0.17 ± 0.04, NaturalVue MFCL –0.13 ± 0.08). Reading performance in words per minute (WPM) was worse with MFCLs (Biofinity MFCL 144 ± 22 WPM, NaturalVue MFCL 150 ± 28 WPM) than with SVCLs (156 ±23 WPM; RM-ANOVA P = .019) regardless of letter size (RM-ANOVA P = .13). No difference in acuity between the MFCLs was detected (RM-ANOVA all P > .05). CONCLUSIONS. MFCLs perform similarly to SVCLs for high-contrast targets and display reduced low-contrast acuity and reading speed. Practitioners should recognize that high-contrast acuity alone does not describe MFCLs visual performance. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|