PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of low-contrast visual acuity and glare sensitivity after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Cantonal Hospital of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland. METHODS: In this prospective study, patients selected PRK or LASIK after the advantages and disadvantages of both had been described. Snellen visual acuity and disability glare were measured with the Berkeley glare test preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. At the 1-year follow-up, haze was graded and patients had to assess their quality of vision subjectively. RESULTS: One-year follow-up of 58 patients in the PRK group and 64 patients in the LASIK group was achieved. In both groups, the mean uncorrected visual acuity was 20/32 (P =.63) and the mean best corrected visual acuity, 20/20 with no statistically significant difference (P =.20). There were no preoperative or postoperative differences between the 2 groups in low-contrast visual acuity under 4 glare conditions. At 1 year, LASIK eyes had significantly lower postoperative haze scores than PRK eyes (P =.0013). The number of eyes with visually moderate and disturbing halos or disturbances in night vision did not differ considerably between the groups (P =.88). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy outcomes were generally similar in the PRK and LASIK groups. Both achieved good objective and subjective results after treatment with a second-generation excimer laser.
PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of low-contrast visual acuity and glare sensitivity after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Cantonal Hospital of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland. METHODS: In this prospective study, patients selected PRK or LASIK after the advantages and disadvantages of both had been described. Snellen visual acuity and disability glare were measured with the Berkeley glare test preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. At the 1-year follow-up, haze was graded and patients had to assess their quality of vision subjectively. RESULTS: One-year follow-up of 58 patients in the PRK group and 64 patients in the LASIK group was achieved. In both groups, the mean uncorrected visual acuity was 20/32 (P =.63) and the mean best corrected visual acuity, 20/20 with no statistically significant difference (P =.20). There were no preoperative or postoperative differences between the 2 groups in low-contrast visual acuity under 4 glare conditions. At 1 year, LASIK eyes had significantly lower postoperative haze scores than PRK eyes (P =.0013). The number of eyes with visually moderate and disturbing halos or disturbances in night vision did not differ considerably between the groups (P =.88). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy outcomes were generally similar in the PRK and LASIK groups. Both achieved good objective and subjective results after treatment with a second-generation excimer laser.