Cargando…
Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia
PURPOSE: To compare three different methods for determining addition in presbyopes. METHODS: The study included 81 subjects with presbyopia who aged 40-70 years. Reading addition values were measured using 3 approaches including the amplitude of accommodation (AA), dynamic retinoscopy (DR), and incr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5000530/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27621785 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.188387 |
_version_ | 1782450304817561600 |
---|---|
author | Yazdani, Negareh Khorasani, Abbas Azimi Moghadam, Hanieh Mirhajian Yekta, Abbas Ali Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi Shandiz, Javad Heravian |
author_facet | Yazdani, Negareh Khorasani, Abbas Azimi Moghadam, Hanieh Mirhajian Yekta, Abbas Ali Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi Shandiz, Javad Heravian |
author_sort | Yazdani, Negareh |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare three different methods for determining addition in presbyopes. METHODS: The study included 81 subjects with presbyopia who aged 40-70 years. Reading addition values were measured using 3 approaches including the amplitude of accommodation (AA), dynamic retinoscopy (DR), and increasing plus lens (IPL). RESULTS: IPL overestimated reading addition relative to other methods. Mean near addition obtained by AA, DR and IPL were 1.31, 1.68 and 1.77, respectively. Our results showed that IPL method could provide 20/20 vision at near in the majority of presbyopic subjects (63.4%). CONCLUSION: The results were approximately the same for 3 methods and provided comparable final addition; however, mean near additions were higher with increasing plus lens compared with the other two methods. In presbyopic individuals, increasing plus lens is recommended as the least time-consuming method with the range of ±0.50 diopter at the 40 cm working distance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5000530 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50005302016-09-12 Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia Yazdani, Negareh Khorasani, Abbas Azimi Moghadam, Hanieh Mirhajian Yekta, Abbas Ali Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi Shandiz, Javad Heravian J Ophthalmic Vis Res Original Article PURPOSE: To compare three different methods for determining addition in presbyopes. METHODS: The study included 81 subjects with presbyopia who aged 40-70 years. Reading addition values were measured using 3 approaches including the amplitude of accommodation (AA), dynamic retinoscopy (DR), and increasing plus lens (IPL). RESULTS: IPL overestimated reading addition relative to other methods. Mean near addition obtained by AA, DR and IPL were 1.31, 1.68 and 1.77, respectively. Our results showed that IPL method could provide 20/20 vision at near in the majority of presbyopic subjects (63.4%). CONCLUSION: The results were approximately the same for 3 methods and provided comparable final addition; however, mean near additions were higher with increasing plus lens compared with the other two methods. In presbyopic individuals, increasing plus lens is recommended as the least time-consuming method with the range of ±0.50 diopter at the 40 cm working distance. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5000530/ /pubmed/27621785 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.188387 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Yazdani, Negareh Khorasani, Abbas Azimi Moghadam, Hanieh Mirhajian Yekta, Abbas Ali Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi Shandiz, Javad Heravian Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title | Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title_full | Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title_fullStr | Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title_short | Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia |
title_sort | evaluating three different methods of determining addition in presbyopia |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5000530/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27621785 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.188387 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yazdaninegareh evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia AT khorasaniabbasazimi evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia AT moghadamhaniehmirhajian evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia AT yektaabbasali evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia AT ostadimoghaddamhadi evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia AT shandizjavadheravian evaluatingthreedifferentmethodsofdeterminingadditioninpresbyopia |