Comparison of near visual acuity and reading metrics in presbyopia correction

PURPOSE: To provide a consistent standard for the evaluation of different types of presbyopic correction. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Presbyopic corrections examined were accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs), simultaneous multifocal and monovision contact lenses, and varifocal spectacles. Binocular near visual acuity measured with different optotypes (uppercase letters, lowercase letters, and words) and reading metrics assessed with the Minnesota Near Reading chart (reading acuity, critical print size [CPS], CPS reading speed) were intercorrelated (Pearson product moment correlations) and assessed for concordance (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) and agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) for indication of clinical usefulness. RESULTS: Nineteen accommodating IOL cases, 40 simultaneous contact lens cases, and 38 varifocal spectacle cases were evaluated. Other than CPS reading speed, all near visual acuity and reading metrics correlated well with each other (r>0.70, P<.001). Near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters was highly concordant (ICC, 0.78) and in close agreement with lowercase letters (+/- 0.17 logMAR). Near word acuity agreed well with reading acuity (+/- 0.16 logMAR), which in turn agreed well with near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters 0.16 logMAR). Concordance (ICC, 0.18 to 0.46) and agreement (+/- 0.24 to 0.30 logMAR) of CPS with the other near metrics was moderate. CONCLUSION: Measurement of near visual ability in presbyopia should be standardized to include assessment of near visual acuity with logMAR uppercase-letter optotypes, smallest logMAR print size that maintains maximum reading speed (CPS), and reading speed. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35:1401-1409 (C) 2009 ASCRS and ESCR

Optimizing measurement of subjective amplitude of accommodation with defocus curves

PURPOSE: To determine whether letter sequences and/or lens-presentation order should be randomized when measuring defocus curves and to assess the most appropriate criterion for calculating the subjective amplitude of accommodation (AoA) from defocus curves. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Defocus curves (from +3.00 diopters [D] to -3.00 D in 0.50 D steps) for 6 possible combinations of randomized or nonrandomized letter sequences and/or lens-presentation order were measured in a random order in 20 presbyopic subjects. Subjective AoA was calculated from the defocus curves by curve fitting using various published criteria, and each was correlated to subjective push-up AoA. Objective AoA was measured for comparison of blur tolerance and pupil size. RESULTS: Randomization of lens-presentation order and/or letter sequences, or lack of, did not affect the measured defocus curves (P>.05, analysis of variance). The range of defocus that maintains highest achievable visual acuity (allowing for variability of repeated measurement) was better correlated to (r = 0.84) and agreed best with ( 0.50 D) subjective push-up AoA than any other relative or absolute acuity criterion used in previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Nonrandomized letters and lens presentation on their own did not affect subjective AoA measured by defocus curves, although their combination should be avoided. Quantification of subjective AoA from defocus curves should be standardized to the range of defocus that maintains the best achievable visual acuity

Rotational and centration stability of an aspheric intraocular lens with a simulated toric design

Purpose: To assess the stability of the Akreos AO intraocular lens (IOL) platform with a simulated toric design using objective image analysis. Setting: Six hospital eye clinics across Europe. Methods: After implantation in 1 eye of patients, IOLs with orientation marks were imaged at 1 to 2 days, 7 to 14 days, 30 to 60 days, and 120 to 180 days. The axis of rotation and IOL centration were objectively assessed using validated image analysis. Results: The study enrolled 107 patients with a mean age of 69.9 years ± 7.7 (SD). The image quality was sufficient for IOL rotation analysis in 91% of eyes. The mean rotation between the first day postoperatively and 120 to 180 days was 1.93 ± 2.33 degrees, with 96% of IOLs rotating fewer than 5 degrees and 99% rotating fewer than 10 degrees. There was no significant rotation between visits and no clear bias in the direction of rotation. In 71% of eyes, the dilation and image quality was sufficient for image analysis of centration. The mean change in centration between 1 day and 120 to 180 days was 0.21 ± 0.11 mm, with all IOLs decentering less than 0.5 mm. There was no significant decentration between visits and no clear bias in the direction of the decentration. Conclusion: Objective analysis of digital retroillumination images taken at different postoperative periods shows the aspheric IOL platform was stable in the eye and is therefore suitable for the application of a toric surface to correct corneal astigmatism

An Italian translation and validation of the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ)

PURPOSE: To validate the Near Activity Vision Questionnaire (NAVQ) in Italian to allow the assessment of presbyopia corrections in Italian-speaking patients. METHODS: An Italian version of the NAVQ was arranged through several steps: an initial forward translation (from English to Italian), a backward translation (from Italian to English), and finally a consensual version to check against the original NAVQ. This prospective study enrolled native Italian-speaking presbyopic patients with corrected distance visual acuity of 0.20 logMAR or better in each eye and free of ocular anomalies. Six different groups of patients were asked to complete the questionnaire: emerging presbyopic patients, reading spectacle users, multifocal spectacle users, multifocal contact lens (CL) wearers, monovision CL wearers, and monofocal intraocular lens patients. Subjects were asked to answer the questionnaire again 2 weeks after the first completion. RESULTS: A total of 207 subjects completed the questionnaire. Data analysis showed good internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.93) and factorial validity with only one factor explaining 62.0% of the variance. Test-retest reliability was extremely good (ICC = 0.92) as well as discriminatory power of the questionnaire's ability to discriminate between subjects with different forms of presbyopic correction. CONCLUSIONS: The Italian version of the NAVQ matches the properties of the original English version. It is a valid instrument to evaluate near activity visual quality of presbyopic Italian speakers

Assessment of dysphotopsia in pseudophakic subjects with multifocal intraocular lenses

Aim: To better understand the phenomenon of dysphotopsia in patients implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Forty-five patients (aged 61.8±8.9 years) implanted bilaterally with Tecnis ZM900 (diffractive multifocal), Lentis Mplus MF30 (segmented refractive multifocal) or Softec-1 (monofocal) IOLs (each n=15) 4–6 months previously and who had achieved a good surgical outcome were examined. Each reported their dysphotopsia symptoms subjectively, identified its form (EyeVisPod illustrations), quantified retinal straylight (C-Quant) and halo perception (Aston halometer). Retinal straylight and halometry was repeated by a second masked clinician to determine interobserver repeatability. Results: Subjective dysphotopsia ratings were able to differentiate Tecnis ZM900 from Lentis Mplus MF30 (p0.10) quantification or between straylight and the halo area (p>0.30). Conclusions: Multifocal IOLs induce symptoms of dysphotopsia. Straylight did not differentiate between IOL designs, however halometry identified clear differences in light scatter due to the IOL optics. Whereas, subjective rating of overall dysphotopsia are not strongly associated with straylight or halo perception, the halometry polar diagram reflected the subjective descriptions of dysphotopsia

Anterior eye health recording.

AIMS: To survey eye care practitioners from around the world regarding their current practice for anterior eye health recording to inform guidelines on best practice. METHODS: The on-line survey examined the reported use of: word descriptions, sketching, grading scales or photographs; paper or computerised record cards and whether these were guided by proforma headings; grading scale choice, signs graded, level of precision, regional grading; and how much time eye care practitioners spent on average on anterior eye health recording. RESULTS: Eight hundred and nine eye care practitioners from across the world completed the survey. Word description (p<0.001), sketches (p=0.002) and grading scales (p<0.001) were used more for recording the anterior eye health of contact lens patients than other patients, but photography was used similarly (p=0.132). Of the respondents, 84.5% used a grading scale, 13.5% using two, with the original Efron (51.6%) and CCLRU/Brien-Holden-Vision-Institute (48.5%) being the most popular. The median features graded was 11 (range 1-23), frequency from 91.6% (bulbar hyperaemia) to 19.6% (endothelial blebs), with most practitioners grading to the nearest unit (47.4%) and just 14.7% to one decimal place. The average time taken to report anterior eye health was reported to be 6.8±5.7 min, with the maximum time available 14.0±11 min. CONCLUSIONS: Developed practice and research evidence allows best practice guidelines for anterior eye health recording to be recommended. It is recommended to: record which grading scale is used; always grade to one decimal place, record what you see live rather than based on how you intend to manage a condition; grade bulbar and limbal hyperaemia, limbal neovascularisation, conjunctival papillary redness and roughness (in white light to assess colouration with fluorescein instilled to aid visualisation of papillae/follicles), blepharitis, meibomian gland dysfunction and sketch staining (both corneal and conjunctival) at every visit. Record other anterior eye features only if they are remarkable, but indicate that the key tissue which have been examined

Tablet App halometer for the assessment of dysphotopsia

Purpose To assess the validity and repeatability of the Aston Halometer. Setting University clinic, United Kingdom. Design Prospective, repeated-measures experimental study. Methods The halometer comprises a bright light-emitting-diode (LED) glare source in the center of an iPad4. Letters subtending 0.21° (∼0.3 logMAR) were moved centrifugally from the LED in 0.05 degree steps in 8 orientations separated by 45 degrees for each of 4 contrast levels (1000, 500, 100, and 25 Weber contrast units [Cw]) in random order. Bangerter occlusion foils were inserted in front of the right eye to simulate monocular glare conditions in 20 subjects (mean age 27.7 ± 3.1 years). Subjects were positioned 2 meters from the screen in a dark room with the iPad controlled from an iPhone via Bluetooth operated by the researcher. The C-Quant straylight meter was also used with each of the foils to measure the level of straylight over the retina. Halometry and straylight repeatability was assessed at a second visit. Results Halo size increased with the different occlusion foils and target contrasts (F = 29.564, P <.001) as expected and in a pattern similar to straylight measures (F = 80.655, P <0.001). Lower contrast letters showed better sensitivity but larger glare-obscured areas, resulting in ceiling effects caused by the screen's field-of-view, with 500 Cw being the best compromise. Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of the Aston Halometer was good (500Cw: 0.84 to 0.93 and 0.53 to 0.73) and similar to the straylight meter. Conclusion The halometer provides a sensitive, repeatable way of quantifying a patient-recognized form of disability glare in multiple orientations to add objectivity to subjectively reported discomfort glare

Multifocal intraocular lens differentiation using defocus curves

Purpose: To determine the most appropriate analysis technique for the differentiation of multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) designs using defocus curve assessment of visual capability.Methods:Four groups of fifteen subjects were implanted bilaterally with either monofocal intraocular lenses, refractive MIOLs, diffractive MIOLs, or a combination of refractive and diffractive MIOLs. Defocus curves between -5.0D and +1.5D were evaluated using an absolute and relative depth-of-focus method, the direct comparison method and a new 'Area-of-focus' metric. The results were correlated with a subjective perception of near and intermediate vision. Results:Neither depth-of-focus method of analysis were sensitive enough to differentiate between MIOL groups (p>0.05). The direct comparison method indicated that the refractive MIOL group performed better at +1.00, -1.00 and -1.50 D and worse at -3.00, -3.50, -4.00 and -5.00D compared to the diffractive MIOL group (

Mechanism of action of the tetraflex accommodative intraocular lens

PURPOSE:To investigate the mechanism of action of the Tetraflex (Lenstec Kellen KH-3500) accommodative intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS:Thirteen eyes of eight patients implanted with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL for at least 2 years underwent assessment of their objective amplitude-of-accommodation by autorefraction, anterior chamber depth and pupil size with optical coherence tomography, and IOL flexure with aberrometry, each viewing a target at 0.0 to 4.00 diopters of accommodative demand. RESULTS:Pupil size decreased by 0.62+/-0.41 mm on increasing accommodative demand, but the Tetraflex IOL was relatively fixed in position within the eye. The ocular aberrations of the eye changed with increased accommodative demand, but not in a consistent manner among individuals. Those aberrations that appeared to be most affected were defocus, vertical primary and secondary astigmatism, vertical coma, horizontal and vertical primary and secondary trefoil, and spherical aberration. CONCLUSIONS:Some of the reported near vision benefits of the Tetraflex accommodating IOL appear to be due to changes in the optical aberrations because of the flexure of the IOL on accommodative effort rather than forward movement within the capsular bag

Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability wa