Cargando…

Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes

PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance of two simultaneous-vision soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal contact lens and its modified monovision counterpart in presbyopic neophytes. METHODS: A double-masked, prospective, comparative study was conducted on 19 participants fitte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parekh, Dhruval, Asokan, Rashima, Purkait, Sutapa, Iqbal, Asif
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37203039
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_2027_22
_version_ 1785082698328440832
author Parekh, Dhruval
Asokan, Rashima
Purkait, Sutapa
Iqbal, Asif
author_facet Parekh, Dhruval
Asokan, Rashima
Purkait, Sutapa
Iqbal, Asif
author_sort Parekh, Dhruval
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance of two simultaneous-vision soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal contact lens and its modified monovision counterpart in presbyopic neophytes. METHODS: A double-masked, prospective, comparative study was conducted on 19 participants fitted with soft PureVision2 multifocal (PVMF) and clariti multifocal (CMF) lenses in random order. High- and low-contrast distance visual acuity, near visual acuity, stereopsis, contrast sensitivity, and glare acuity were measured. The measurements were conducted using multifocal and modified monovision design with one brand and then repeated with another brand of lens. RESULTS: High-contrast distance visual acuity showed a significant difference between CMF (0.00 [−0.10–0.04]) and PureVision2 modified monovision (PVMMV; −0.10 [−0.14–0.00]) correction (P = 0.003) and also between CMF and clariti modified monovision (CMMV; −0.10 [−0.20–0.00]) correction (P = 0.002). Both modified monovision lenses outperformed CMF. The current study did not show any statistically significant difference between contact lens corrections for low-contrast visual acuity, near visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity (P > 0.01). Stereopsis at near distance was significantly lower with both modified monovision (PVMMV: 70 [50–85]; P = 0.007, CMMV: 70 [70–100]; P = 0.006) and with CMF (50 [40–70]; P = 0.005) when compared to spectacles (50 [30–70]). Glare acuity was significantly lower with multifocal (PVMF: 0.46 [0.40–0.50]; P = 0.001, CMF: 0.40 [0.40–0.46]; P = 0.007) compared with spectacles (0.40 [0.30–0.40]), but no significant difference was noted between the multifocal contact lenses (P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Modified monovision provided superior high-contrast vision compared to multifocal correction. Multifocal corrections performed better for stereopsis when compared to modified monovision. In parameters like low-contrast visual acuity, near acuity, and contrast sensitivity, both the corrections performed similarly. Both multifocal designs showed comparable visual performances.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10391403
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103914032023-08-02 Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes Parekh, Dhruval Asokan, Rashima Purkait, Sutapa Iqbal, Asif Indian J Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance of two simultaneous-vision soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal contact lens and its modified monovision counterpart in presbyopic neophytes. METHODS: A double-masked, prospective, comparative study was conducted on 19 participants fitted with soft PureVision2 multifocal (PVMF) and clariti multifocal (CMF) lenses in random order. High- and low-contrast distance visual acuity, near visual acuity, stereopsis, contrast sensitivity, and glare acuity were measured. The measurements were conducted using multifocal and modified monovision design with one brand and then repeated with another brand of lens. RESULTS: High-contrast distance visual acuity showed a significant difference between CMF (0.00 [−0.10–0.04]) and PureVision2 modified monovision (PVMMV; −0.10 [−0.14–0.00]) correction (P = 0.003) and also between CMF and clariti modified monovision (CMMV; −0.10 [−0.20–0.00]) correction (P = 0.002). Both modified monovision lenses outperformed CMF. The current study did not show any statistically significant difference between contact lens corrections for low-contrast visual acuity, near visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity (P > 0.01). Stereopsis at near distance was significantly lower with both modified monovision (PVMMV: 70 [50–85]; P = 0.007, CMMV: 70 [70–100]; P = 0.006) and with CMF (50 [40–70]; P = 0.005) when compared to spectacles (50 [30–70]). Glare acuity was significantly lower with multifocal (PVMF: 0.46 [0.40–0.50]; P = 0.001, CMF: 0.40 [0.40–0.46]; P = 0.007) compared with spectacles (0.40 [0.30–0.40]), but no significant difference was noted between the multifocal contact lenses (P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Modified monovision provided superior high-contrast vision compared to multifocal correction. Multifocal corrections performed better for stereopsis when compared to modified monovision. In parameters like low-contrast visual acuity, near acuity, and contrast sensitivity, both the corrections performed similarly. Both multifocal designs showed comparable visual performances. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023-05 2023-05-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10391403/ /pubmed/37203039 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_2027_22 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Indian Journal of Ophthalmology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Parekh, Dhruval
Asokan, Rashima
Purkait, Sutapa
Iqbal, Asif
Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title_full Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title_fullStr Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title_full_unstemmed Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title_short Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
title_sort multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: a non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37203039
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_2027_22
work_keys_str_mv AT parekhdhruval multifocalversusmodifiedmonovisioncorrectionsanondispensingcomparisonofvisualassessmentinpresbyopicneophytes
AT asokanrashima multifocalversusmodifiedmonovisioncorrectionsanondispensingcomparisonofvisualassessmentinpresbyopicneophytes
AT purkaitsutapa multifocalversusmodifiedmonovisioncorrectionsanondispensingcomparisonofvisualassessmentinpresbyopicneophytes
AT iqbalasif multifocalversusmodifiedmonovisioncorrectionsanondispensingcomparisonofvisualassessmentinpresbyopicneophytes