Successful Monovision Contact Lens Wearers Refitted With Bifocal Contact Lenses

Purpose. Should successful monovision contact lens wearers be refitted with bifocal lenses? Methods. Fifty current monovision lens wearers were fitted with ACUVUE Bifocal contact lenses (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Jacksonville, FL). Visual function and subjective vision ratings were assessed with habitual monovision lenses at the first visit and then were repeated at the end of 6 months while wearing bifocal lenses. Lens preference was determined at the end of the 6-month study, and the subjects were called 1 year later to repeat the lens preference questionnaire. Results. Forty (80%) subjects completed the 6-month study; nine discontinued for visual reasons. At the end of 6 months of wear, 68% preferred bifocal lenses and 25% preferred monovision. Of the subjects who were contacted a year later, 53% were still wearing bifocal lenses. High-contrast visual acuity and letter contrast sensitivity at distance was the same for monovision and bifocal lenses, but low-contrast acuity was better with monovision. Intermediate low- and high-contrast acuity and 3-meter and near stereoscopic acuity were better with bifocal lenses. Near high- and low-contrast acuity were better with monovision. All subjective ratings, except near vision in poor lighting, were significantly greater with bifocal lenses. Conclusions. It is possible to refit successful monovision lens wearers with simultaneous vision bifocal lenses, and these lenses should be considered as an alternative method for the correction of presbyopia. In addition, subjective responses to bifocal lenses may not be reflective of visual function measurements.

[1]  J E Key,et al.  Prospective clinical evaluation of the Acuvue Bifocal contact lens. , 1999, The CLAO journal : official publication of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc.

[2]  B. Holden,et al.  Correction of Presbyopia with Contact Lenses: Comparative Success Rates with Three Systems , 1989, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[3]  P. Romano,et al.  Stereoacuity degradation by experimental and real monocular and binocular amblyopia. , 1985, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  P Erickson Potential range of clear vision in monovision. , 1988, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[5]  A Back,et al.  Comparative Visual Performance of Three Presbyopic Contact Lens Corrections , 1992, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[6]  J E Sheedy,et al.  Task and Visual Performance with Concentric Bifocal Contact Lenses , 1991, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[7]  R. Woods,et al.  The comparative visual performance of monovision and various concentric bifocals , 1987 .

[8]  S. McKee,et al.  Stereoscopic acuity with defocused and spatially filtered retinal images , 1980 .

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

[10]  C. Hutnik,et al.  Multifocal contact lenses--look again! , 1997, Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie.

[11]  T Simpson,et al.  The suppression effect of simulated anisometropia , 1991, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[12]  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.

[13]  P Erickson,et al.  Patterns of Binocular Suppression and Accommodation in Monovision , 1988, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[14]  C. Schor,et al.  Effects of interocular blur suppression ability on monovision task performance. , 1989, Journal of the American Optometric Association.