Eye & contact lens · 2023
Optical Quality and Visual Performance With Different Toric Contact Lens Designs.
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.
Koh Shizuka, Maeda Naoyuki, Terao Misaki, Maeda Hiroko, Kosaki Ryo, Kozaki Jun, Nishida Kohji
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the optical quality of different toric contact lens (CL) designs and compare their on-eye visual correction performance.
METHODS: Twenty soft CL wearers aged 20 to 39 years were enrolled. Two daily disposable silicone-hydrogel toric CLs were tested: the "Eyelid Stabilized Design" (ESD-CL) and prism-ballast design (PB-CL); a spherical daily disposable silicone hydrogel CL (spherical CL) was used as a control. On-eye performance was compared for corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), astigmatism, and ocular higher-order aberrations (HOAs); astigmatism and ocular HOAs were measured with a wavefront sensor. The subjective quality of vision, rated for "blurred vision" and "double vision," lens rotation, and fitting were also compared.
RESULTS: The ESD-CLs, PB-CL, and no-CL provided better CDVA than spherical CL ( P <0.05). Compared with spherical CL and no CL, PB-CL and ESD-CLs caused significantly lesser astigmatism ( P <0.05). Coma was significantly lesser with ESD-CLs than that with PB-CL ( P <0.05); total HOAs did not differ among the four conditions. The subjective ratings for blurred and double vision were significantly lower with ESD-CLs than those with spherical CL ( P <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Toric CLs provide a better CDVA than spherical CLs. However, differences in coma and subjective symptoms may occur because of the design of toric CLs.
METHODS: Twenty soft CL wearers aged 20 to 39 years were enrolled. Two daily disposable silicone-hydrogel toric CLs were tested: the "Eyelid Stabilized Design" (ESD-CL) and prism-ballast design (PB-CL); a spherical daily disposable silicone hydrogel CL (spherical CL) was used as a control. On-eye performance was compared for corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), astigmatism, and ocular higher-order aberrations (HOAs); astigmatism and ocular HOAs were measured with a wavefront sensor. The subjective quality of vision, rated for "blurred vision" and "double vision," lens rotation, and fitting were also compared.
RESULTS: The ESD-CLs, PB-CL, and no-CL provided better CDVA than spherical CL ( P <0.05). Compared with spherical CL and no CL, PB-CL and ESD-CLs caused significantly lesser astigmatism ( P <0.05). Coma was significantly lesser with ESD-CLs than that with PB-CL ( P <0.05); total HOAs did not differ among the four conditions. The subjective ratings for blurred and double vision were significantly lower with ESD-CLs than those with spherical CL ( P <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Toric CLs provide a better CDVA than spherical CLs. However, differences in coma and subjective symptoms may occur because of the design of toric CLs.