Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2003
Comparison of myopes and hyperopes after laser in situ keratomileusis monovision.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Goldberg Daniel B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) monovision in myopes and hyperopes.
SETTING: Private practice, Little Silver, New Jersey, USA.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, 391 consecutive patients older than 40 years who had LASIK between December 1999 and June 2001 were examined. All patients were asked to complete a questionnaire, and study results are based on the analysis of data from patient charts correlated with questionnaire responses.
RESULTS: Visual results were excellent in both groups, with all monovision patients achieving 20/30 acuity or better in the distance eye and J2 or better acuity in the near eye. Satisfaction scores were high in all groups. Statistical analysis indicated that visual results for distance were better in myopes than in hyperopes (P =.043), enhancements were higher in monovision (P =.04) and in hyperopia (P =.08), and satisfaction was higher among myopes (P =.012) and full distance patients (P =.002). Monovision hyperopes had the most difficulty with 6 side effects (P =.00).
CONCLUSION: Hyperopic monovision was a viable but more problematic solution to correcting presbyopia than myopic monovision.
SETTING: Private practice, Little Silver, New Jersey, USA.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, 391 consecutive patients older than 40 years who had LASIK between December 1999 and June 2001 were examined. All patients were asked to complete a questionnaire, and study results are based on the analysis of data from patient charts correlated with questionnaire responses.
RESULTS: Visual results were excellent in both groups, with all monovision patients achieving 20/30 acuity or better in the distance eye and J2 or better acuity in the near eye. Satisfaction scores were high in all groups. Statistical analysis indicated that visual results for distance were better in myopes than in hyperopes (P =.043), enhancements were higher in monovision (P =.04) and in hyperopia (P =.08), and satisfaction was higher among myopes (P =.012) and full distance patients (P =.002). Monovision hyperopes had the most difficulty with 6 side effects (P =.00).
CONCLUSION: Hyperopic monovision was a viable but more problematic solution to correcting presbyopia than myopic monovision.