Cargando…

The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia

BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial was to compare the effectiveness of two generations of progressive lenses for presbyopia. METHODS: A multicenter cross-over randomized controlled trial performed in a primary care setting (5 optical dispensaries) was planned. Two categories of progressive lenses wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boutron, Isabelle, Touizer, Caroline, Pitrou, Isabelle, Roy, Carine, Ravaud, Philippe
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18803826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-9-54
_version_ 1782159615924895744
author Boutron, Isabelle
Touizer, Caroline
Pitrou, Isabelle
Roy, Carine
Ravaud, Philippe
author_facet Boutron, Isabelle
Touizer, Caroline
Pitrou, Isabelle
Roy, Carine
Ravaud, Philippe
author_sort Boutron, Isabelle
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial was to compare the effectiveness of two generations of progressive lenses for presbyopia. METHODS: A multicenter cross-over randomized controlled trial performed in a primary care setting (5 optical dispensaries) was planned. Two categories of progressive lenses were compared: 1) a new-generation lens (i.e., VARILUX PANAMIC ORMA CRIZAL), which is expensive but a supposed improvement in comfort, and 2) an older-generation lens (i.e., VARILUX CONFORT ORMA CRIZAL), which is less expensive and is considered the reference lens. Patients were randomized to wear one generation of progressive lens for 4 weeks, then cross over to wear the other lens for 4 weeks, without knowing the sequence of lenses. Inclusion criteria were 1) age 43–60 years; 2) outpatients already wearing progressive lenses and referred to an optician ophthalmologist for optical correction prescription within the last 6 months; 3) receiving a correction of ≤3 dioptres in cases of associated myopia, hyperopia or astigmatism; 4) understanding and speaking French and able to answer a questionnaire; and 5) giving written consent to participate in the study. The primary outcome was patient preference for one progressive lens at week 8. Secondary outcomes were subjective measures of bifocal visual performance, including a) near visual acuity, b) visual field, c) kinetic visual skills, d) visual adaptability, e) visual comfort, and f) rapidity of adaptation. RESULTS: 127 patients were randomized to one of the lens groups. Two patients withdrew prematurely; 98.4% and 97.6% patients who wore the new versus older lenses, respectively, wore their progressive lenses every day during the 4-week period 1 and period 2. The number of participants in each of 5 centres varied from 16 (12.6%) to 35 (27.6%). 57.9% patients preferred the new-generation lenses, 36.5% the older-generation lenses, and 5.6% had no preference (p = 0.01). The two groups did not differ in any of the measures of bifocal visual performance except near visual acuity. CONCLUSION: Patients with presbyopia had slightly higher preference for the new-generation than older-generation lens, with no difference in lens groups for most of the visual outcomes assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00635115
format Text
id pubmed-2556995
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25569952008-10-02 The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia Boutron, Isabelle Touizer, Caroline Pitrou, Isabelle Roy, Carine Ravaud, Philippe Trials Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial was to compare the effectiveness of two generations of progressive lenses for presbyopia. METHODS: A multicenter cross-over randomized controlled trial performed in a primary care setting (5 optical dispensaries) was planned. Two categories of progressive lenses were compared: 1) a new-generation lens (i.e., VARILUX PANAMIC ORMA CRIZAL), which is expensive but a supposed improvement in comfort, and 2) an older-generation lens (i.e., VARILUX CONFORT ORMA CRIZAL), which is less expensive and is considered the reference lens. Patients were randomized to wear one generation of progressive lens for 4 weeks, then cross over to wear the other lens for 4 weeks, without knowing the sequence of lenses. Inclusion criteria were 1) age 43–60 years; 2) outpatients already wearing progressive lenses and referred to an optician ophthalmologist for optical correction prescription within the last 6 months; 3) receiving a correction of ≤3 dioptres in cases of associated myopia, hyperopia or astigmatism; 4) understanding and speaking French and able to answer a questionnaire; and 5) giving written consent to participate in the study. The primary outcome was patient preference for one progressive lens at week 8. Secondary outcomes were subjective measures of bifocal visual performance, including a) near visual acuity, b) visual field, c) kinetic visual skills, d) visual adaptability, e) visual comfort, and f) rapidity of adaptation. RESULTS: 127 patients were randomized to one of the lens groups. Two patients withdrew prematurely; 98.4% and 97.6% patients who wore the new versus older lenses, respectively, wore their progressive lenses every day during the 4-week period 1 and period 2. The number of participants in each of 5 centres varied from 16 (12.6%) to 35 (27.6%). 57.9% patients preferred the new-generation lenses, 36.5% the older-generation lenses, and 5.6% had no preference (p = 0.01). The two groups did not differ in any of the measures of bifocal visual performance except near visual acuity. CONCLUSION: Patients with presbyopia had slightly higher preference for the new-generation than older-generation lens, with no difference in lens groups for most of the visual outcomes assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00635115 BioMed Central 2008-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC2556995/ /pubmed/18803826 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-9-54 Text en Copyright © 2008 Boutron et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Boutron, Isabelle
Touizer, Caroline
Pitrou, Isabelle
Roy, Carine
Ravaud, Philippe
The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title_full The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title_fullStr The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title_full_unstemmed The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title_short The VEPRO trial: A cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
title_sort vepro trial: a cross-over randomised controlled trial comparing 2 progressive lenses for patients with presbyopia
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18803826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-9-54
work_keys_str_mv AT boutronisabelle theveprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT touizercaroline theveprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT pitrouisabelle theveprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT roycarine theveprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT ravaudphilippe theveprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT boutronisabelle veprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT touizercaroline veprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT pitrouisabelle veprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT roycarine veprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia
AT ravaudphilippe veprotrialacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrialcomparing2progressivelensesforpatientswithpresbyopia