Visual Acuity and “Balanced Progressive” Simultaneous Vision Multifocal Contact Lenses

Objectives. To investigate how add power affects binocular distance visual acuity in subjects wearing simultaneous vision, balanced progressive, multifocal contact lenses. Methods. Twenty-five young normally sighted subjects were fit binocularly, according to the manufacturers’ fitting nomogram, with CooperVision Proclear Multifocal contact lenses. A multifactorial experimental design was used to study distance visual acuity measured to the single letter with repeated measures on add power (+1.00, +1.50, +2.00, +2.50), light level (photopic and mesopic), and Bailey-Lovie chart contrast (high and low). Results. The relationship between add power and visual acuity was analyzed by linear regression for each of the 4 test conditions. The corresponding mean decrease in equivalent Snellen visual acuity from 20/16 to 20/17 between the +1.00 and +2.50 add powers for the photopic light level, high contrast test condition was not significant (F = 3.068, P=0.083). However, the change in visual acuity from 20/24 to 20/27 between the same add powers for the low contrast, photopic test condition was significant (P=0.048), as was the loss in visual acuity from 20/24 to 20/28 for the high contrast, mesopic test condition (P=0.005) and the reduction from 20/45 to 20/61 for the low contrast, mesopic light level test condition (P=1.5 × 10−5). Pupil diameter averaged 3.9 ± 0.07 mm and 6.2 ± 0.12 mm under photopic and mesopic light levels, respectively. Conclusions. Distance visual acuity averaged better than 20/20 for all add powers under high contrast, high illumination test conditions and decreased by a small, but significant amount, under other testing conditions.

[1]  I L Bailey,et al.  New Design Principles for Visual Acuity Letter Charts* , 1976, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[2]  F. Ferris,et al.  New visual acuity charts for clinical research. , 1982, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  P Erickson,et al.  Performance Characteristics of a Hydrophilic Concentric Bifocal Contact Lens , 1985, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[4]  A. Apollonio,et al.  Optical design considerations for contact lens bifocals. , 1988, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[5]  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.

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

[7]  P Erickson,et al.  Visual Function with Presbyopic Contact Lens Correction , 1990, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[8]  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.

[9]  J. Lovie-Kitchin,et al.  Repeated Visual Acuity Measurement: Establishing the Patient's Own Criterion for Change , 1993, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

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

[11]  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.

[12]  Lewis N. Reich,et al.  (CL-112)MONOCULAR DISTANCE VISUAL ACUITY VERSUS ADD POWER IN BIFOCAL CONTACT LENSES: 1:20 pm , 2000 .

[13]  Fisher,et al.  Evaluation of two new soft contact lenses for correction of presbyopia: the Focus Progressives multifocal and the Acuvue Bifocal. , 1999, International contact lens clinic.

[14]  E. Birch,et al.  Stereoacuity and foveal fusion in adults with long-standing surgical monovision. , 2001, Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus.

[15]  Kamilla RUN JOHANNSDOTTIR,et al.  Monovision: a Review of the Scientific Literature , 2001, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[16]  Philip Cooper,et al.  Visual performance of a multi-zone bifocal and a progressive multifocal contact lens. , 2002, The CLAO journal : official publication of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc.

[17]  J Pujol,et al.  Optical performance in eyes wearing two multifocal contact lens designs , 2003, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[18]  Silvia W. Zandvoort,et al.  Good subjective presbyopic correction with newly designed aspheric multifocal contact lens , 1993, International Ophthalmology.

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

[20]  J. Holladay,et al.  Visual acuity measurements. , 2004, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[21]  Aruna S. Rajagopalan,et al.  Visual Performance of Subjects Wearing Presbyopic Contact Lenses , 2006, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[22]  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.

[23]  Tina Callina,et al.  Traditional methods for the treatment of presbyopia: spectacles, contact lenses, bifocal contact lenses. , 2006, Ophthalmology clinics of North America.

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