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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yazdani, Negareh, Khorasani, Abbas Azimi, Moghadam, Hanieh Mirhajian, Yekta, Abbas Ali, Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi, Shandiz, Javad Heravian
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