Visual Performance of a Multifocal Contact Lens versus Monovision in Established Presbyopes

Purpose To compare subjective and objective visual performance of the Air Optix Aqua Multifocal lens to monovision in a group of subjects requiring a medium level of reading-addition power. Methods Fifty participants with reading additions between 1.25 and 2.00 diopters (inclusive) were randomized into a prospective, crossover clinical trial. They wore monovision and multifocals for 2 weeks in a randomized order. High- and low-contrast logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) acuity and stereopsis were measured at the beginning and end of each period. During each phase, participants performed specific tasks followed by subjective rating surveys and also completed satisfaction rating surveys on days 3, 7, and 12; all were transferred in real time using BlackBerry smartphones. A general rating survey was completed at the dispensing and 2-week visits. Results Forty-nine participants completed the study (mean age, 52 years). Distance and near high- and low-contrast acuities were significantly better (p < 0.05) with monovision at all visits. High-contrast intermediate acuity was only better (p < 0.05) with multifocals after 2 weeks. Stereopsis was equivalent after 2 weeks, but better (p < 0.05) with multifocals at dispensing. Subjective ratings were generally equivalent between modalities although there was a trend for multifocals to be rated higher for focus changing and driving, whereas monovision tended to be rated higher for near tasks. For both corrections, the satisfaction survey showed no significant change between days 3, 7, and 12, and the general survey showed that comfort was maintained but subjective vision ratings decreased significantly over the 2 weeks. Twenty-five participants (51%) preferred multifocals, 18 (37%) preferred monovision, and the remaining 6 (12%) declared both unacceptable. Conclusions In this cohort, distance and near acuities were better with monovision, whereas the subjective ratings tended to favor the Air Optix Aqua Multifocal, with the exception of near performance. Preference was statistically similar between both corrections, with a trend toward preferring the multifocal.

[1]  Ping Situ,et al.  Successful Monovision Contact Lens Wearers Refitted With Bifocal Contact Lenses , 2003, Eye & contact lens.

[2]  Eric B. Papas,et al.  Monovision vs. soft diffractive bifocal contact lenses: A crossover study , 1990 .

[3]  Sotiris Plainis,et al.  Binocular summation improves performance to defocus-induced blur. , 2011, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  Ping Situ,et al.  Utility of Short-Term Evaluation of Presbyopic Contact Lens Performance , 2009, Eye & contact lens.

[5]  Navneet Gupta,et al.  Visual Comparison of Multifocal Contact Lens to Monovision , 2009, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[6]  M. Vilaseca,et al.  Task oriented visual satisfaction and wearing success with two different simultaneous vision multifocal soft contact lenses , 2011 .

[7]  M. Guillon,et al.  Soft Contact Lens Visual Performance: A Multicenter Study , 1991, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[8]  Klaus Ehrmann,et al.  Optical Performance of Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses via a Single-Pass Method , 2012, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[9]  J. Buring,et al.  Prevalence of dry eye syndrome among US women. , 2003, American journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  Magne Helland,et al.  Daily disposable contact lens prescribing around the world. , 2010, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[11]  G. Mitchell,et al.  Comparison of Multifocal and Monovision Soft Contact Lens Corrections in Patients With Low-Astigmatic Presbyopia , 2006, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[12]  Bruce J W Evans,et al.  Monovision: a review , 2007, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[13]  J. Woods,et al.  Early Symptomatic Presbyopes—What Correction Modality Works Best? , 2009, Eye & contact lens.

[14]  N. Pritchard,et al.  A multi‐centre study of lapsed contact lens wearers , 2002, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[15]  J. González-Méijome,et al.  Adaptation to Multifocal and Monovision Contact Lens Correction , 2013, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[16]  Sotiris Plainis,et al.  Through‐focus performance with multifocal contact lenses: effect of binocularity, pupil diameter and inherent ocular aberrations , 2013, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[17]  Teresa Ferrer‐Blasco,et al.  Stereoacuity with balanced presbyopic contact lenses , 2011, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[18]  P. Morgan,et al.  Contact lens correction of presbyopia. , 2009, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[19]  J E Sheedy,et al.  Vision and Task Performance with Monovision and Diffractive Bifocal Contact Lenses , 1992, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[20]  W. Neil Charman,et al.  Theoretical and practical factors influencingthe optical performance of contact lenses for the presbyope , 1990 .

[21]  P. Morgan,et al.  An international survey of contact lens prescribing for presbyopia , 2010, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[22]  P. Morgan,et al.  Determinants of the Frequency of Contact Lens Wear , 2013, Eye & contact lens.

[23]  H. Swarbrick,et al.  Ocular aberrations and visual function with multifocal versus single vision soft contact lenses. , 2013, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[24]  Balamurali Vasudevan,et al.  Objective and subjective visual performance of multifocal contact lenses: pilot study. , 2014, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[25]  D. Kirschen,et al.  Comparison of suppression, stereoacuity, and interocular differences in visual acuity in monovision and acuvue bifocal contact lenses. , 1999, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[26]  P. Caroline,et al.  The effect of add power on distance vision with the acuvue bifocal contact lens. , 2004, Optometry.

[27]  Lyndon Jones,et al.  Patient Use of Smartphones to Communicate Subjective Data in Clinical Trials , 2011, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[28]  H. Taylor,et al.  The epidemiology of dry eye in Melbourne, Australia , 1998 .