[Comparison Study of Visual Function and Patient Satisfaction in Patients with Monovision and Patients with Bilateral Multifocal Intraocular Lenses]
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Objective: To compare visual function and patient satisfaction in patients with bilateral diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and patients with monofocal IOL monovision.
Methods: Prospective nonrandomized controlled study. This study comprised consecutive bilateral cataract patients 45 cases (90eyes) between January 2011 and March 2012. All cases were divided into two groups: multifocal IOL group (23 patients) having implantation of AcrySof ReSTOR +3D(SN6AD1) multifocal IOL, monovision group (22 patients) having implantation of AcrySof IQ (SN60WF) IOL. Parameters analyzed 3 months postoperatively included binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities; stereo vision;photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity function without glare. Parameters analyzed 6 months postoperatively included spectacle independence; subjective visual symptoms; and patient satisfaction. The independent-samples t test were used to compare the measure data which met normal distribution. The chi-square test was applied to compare categorical variables.
Results: There were no significant differences between groups in bilateral uncorrected distance vision (0.13 ± 0.06, 0.17 ± 0.19; Z = 1.755, P = 0.086) , intermediate (0.34 ± 0.05,0.33 ± 0.06; Z = -0.821, P = 0.416) , and near vision (0.35 ± 0.06, 0.41 ± 0.09; Z = 2.117, P = 0.051) . There were significant differences between groups in stereo vision (Median: 150″, 525″; Z = -2.092, P = 0.036) . Percentage of patients wearing spectacle were less than 10% in all groups [91.3% (21/23), 90.9% (20/22) ].On the questionnaire, patients in multifocal IOL group complained with double vision, trouble in night vision and halo(21.7%).
Conclusions: Pseudophakic monovision and MIOL achieved distance vision, intermediate vision and near vision. But monovision was no risk for disturbing visual symptoms associated with multifocal IOL.
Park E, Ahn H, Han S, Jun I, Seo K, Kim E Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):21716.
PMID: 36522397 PMC: 9755282. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-26315-7.
Hafez T, Helaly H Clin Ophthalmol. 2019; 13:2111-2117.
PMID: 31802840 PMC: 6827509. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S215229.
Pseudophakic mini-monovision: high patient satisfaction, reduced spectacle dependence, and low cost.
Goldberg D, Goldberg M, Shah R, Meagher J, Ailani H BMC Ophthalmol. 2018; 18(1):293.
PMID: 30413145 PMC: 6230294. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-018-0963-3.
A systematic review of pseudophakic monovision for presbyopia correction.
Labiris G, Toli A, Perente A, Ntonti P, Kozobolis V Int J Ophthalmol. 2017; 10(6):992-1000.
PMID: 28730093 PMC: 5515155. DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2017.06.24.
Tang Y, Song H, Chen J, Tang X Int J Ophthalmol. 2015; 8(6):1146-50.
PMID: 26682163 PMC: 4651879. DOI: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2015.06.12.