Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 13

Visual Outcomes, Visual Quality and Patient Satisfaction: Comparing a Blended Bifocal Approach to Bilateral Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation

Authors Hammond MD, Potvin R

Received 28 September 2019

Accepted for publication 14 November 2019

Published 27 November 2019 Volume 2019:13 Pages 2325—2332

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S232800

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Nicola Ludin

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser


Matthew D Hammond,1 Richard Potvin2

1Swagel Wootton Eye Institute, Mesa, AZ, USA; 2Science in Vision, Akron, NY, USA

Correspondence: Richard Potvin 6197 Dye Road, Akron, NY 14001, USA
Tel +1 407-697-6008
Email rick@scienceinvision.com

Purpose: To compare visual outcomes, quality of vision and patient satisfaction between a blended apodized diffractive bifocal lens combination and bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL).
Patients and methods: Subjects implanted with either the blended bifocal (Blended) or bilateral extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL combinations were examined 3 to 24 months after second eye surgery. The primary outcome measure was the patient’s best distance-corrected near visual acuity (VA) at 40cm. The secondary outcome measures were scores on the Quality of Vision Survey, the Catquest-9SF and the Visual Functioning Questionnaires, uncorrected binocular intermediate and near VA at 4–6m, 60cm and 40cm, the manifest refraction and the best-corrected monocular and binocular distance VA.
Results: Twenty-five EDOF subjects and 23 blended subjects were analyzed. The uncorrected and best-distance corrected intermediate VA was statistically significantly better in the EDOF group (p < 0.05); no other significant differences were noted at distance or near. The EDOF group had significantly higher percentage of patients having no difficulty with hobbies and handicrafts (p < 0.05). Eighty-seven percent of the blended subjects and 79% of the EDOF subjects were “very” or “fairly” satisfied with their vision (p = 0.52). The frequency, severity and degree of bother from visual disturbances were comparable between the two groups; however, more subjects in the EDOF group reported severe disturbances (36% vs 4%).
Conclusion: Distance and near VA are similar with both IOL designs, but intermediate VA was better with the EDOF IOL resulting in lower difficulty with intermediate tasks such as hobbies and handicrafts. Despite the difference at intermediate VA, satisfaction was similar between the two groups and there were greater reports of severe visual disturbances in the EDOF group.

Keywords: ReSTOR, Symfony, multifocal, extended range of vision, cataract surgery


Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]