Ophthalmology and therapy · 2021
Comparison of Visual Performance and Patient Satisfaction After Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation and During Multifocal Contact Lens Wear After Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Pilot Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kamiya Kazutaka, Iijima Kei, Hiraoka Takahiro, Takada Keita, Mori Yosai, Miyata Kazunori
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance and patient satisfaction in multifocal intraocular lens (IOL)-implanted eyes and multifocal contact lens (CL)-wearing eyes undergoing monofocal IOL implantation.
METHODS: We retrospectively assessed visual acuity at all distances (0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, and 5 m), contrast sensitivity function, patient satisfaction score, and the rate of spectacle independence in the multifocal IOL and multifocal CL groups.
RESULTS: Binocular visual acuity at 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, and 5 m was 0.05 ± 0.11, - 0.02 ± 0.09, - 0.02 ± 0.09, - 0.02 ± 0.09, and - 0.04 ± 0.07, respectively, in the multifocal IOL group and 0.25 ± 0.13, 0.04 ± 0.10, 0.01 ± 0.09, - 0.01 ± 0.07, and 0.00 ± 0.08, respectively, in the multifocal CL group. We found significant differences in visual acuity at all distances. The area under the log contrast sensitivity function was 1.32 ± 0.14 and 1.33 ± 0.16 in the multifocal IOL and CL groups, respectively (p = 0.444). The patient satisfaction score for overall vision was 80.2 ± 20.6 and 82.9 ± 10.5 (p = 0.889), and the rate of spectacle independence was 23.4% and 41.7% in the multifocal IOL and CL groups, respectively (p = 0.277).
CONCLUSIONS: According to our experience, both multifocal IOLs and CLs provided good near-to-distance binocular vision and subsequent high patient satisfaction in daily activities with acceptable contrast sensitivity, suggesting their viability for presbyopic correction in elderly subjects.
METHODS: We retrospectively assessed visual acuity at all distances (0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, and 5 m), contrast sensitivity function, patient satisfaction score, and the rate of spectacle independence in the multifocal IOL and multifocal CL groups.
RESULTS: Binocular visual acuity at 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, and 5 m was 0.05 ± 0.11, - 0.02 ± 0.09, - 0.02 ± 0.09, - 0.02 ± 0.09, and - 0.04 ± 0.07, respectively, in the multifocal IOL group and 0.25 ± 0.13, 0.04 ± 0.10, 0.01 ± 0.09, - 0.01 ± 0.07, and 0.00 ± 0.08, respectively, in the multifocal CL group. We found significant differences in visual acuity at all distances. The area under the log contrast sensitivity function was 1.32 ± 0.14 and 1.33 ± 0.16 in the multifocal IOL and CL groups, respectively (p = 0.444). The patient satisfaction score for overall vision was 80.2 ± 20.6 and 82.9 ± 10.5 (p = 0.889), and the rate of spectacle independence was 23.4% and 41.7% in the multifocal IOL and CL groups, respectively (p = 0.277).
CONCLUSIONS: According to our experience, both multifocal IOLs and CLs provided good near-to-distance binocular vision and subsequent high patient satisfaction in daily activities with acceptable contrast sensitivity, suggesting their viability for presbyopic correction in elderly subjects.