PURPOSE: To investigate color perception and contrast sensitivity with and without additional glare in pseudophakic patients with a conventional intraocular lens (IOL) in one eye and a blue light-filtering IOL in the fellow eye. METHODS: Twenty-three bilaterally pseudophakic patients with a conventional IOL (AcrySof SA60AT) and a blue light-filtering IOL (AcrySof Natural SN60AT) were tested for intraindividual comparison of visual acuity (ETDRS chart), color perception (Farnsworth-Munsell 100-Hue test), and contrast sensitivity with and without glare (Contrast Sensitivity Pattern Generator). Information about subjective perception was gathered through a questionnaire. RESULTS: Four patients (17.4%) observed some difference in monocular color perception. Color testing did not show significantly different results for the two IOL types expressed as total error score and segmental error subscores for protan, deutan, and tritan ranges. Regarding contrast sensitivity, 5 patients (21.7%) indicated noticeable difference between the two eyes. Contrast sensitivity testing, however, showed similar curves for the two IOL types with and without additional glare. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some subjective difference in color and contrast perception in a minority of patients, the study did not show significantly different results for the two IOL types.
PURPOSE: To investigate color perception and contrast sensitivity with and without additional glare in pseudophakic patients with a conventional intraocular lens (IOL) in one eye and a blue light-filtering IOL in the fellow eye. METHODS: Twenty-three bilaterally pseudophakic patients with a conventional IOL (AcrySof SA60AT) and a blue light-filtering IOL (AcrySof Natural SN60AT) were tested for intraindividual comparison of visual acuity (ETDRS chart), color perception (Farnsworth-Munsell 100-Hue test), and contrast sensitivity with and without glare (Contrast Sensitivity Pattern Generator). Information about subjective perception was gathered through a questionnaire. RESULTS: Four patients (17.4%) observed some difference in monocular color perception. Color testing did not show significantly different results for the two IOL types expressed as total error score and segmental error subscores for protan, deutan, and tritan ranges. Regarding contrast sensitivity, 5 patients (21.7%) indicated noticeable difference between the two eyes. Contrast sensitivity testing, however, showed similar curves for the two IOL types with and without additional glare. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some subjective difference in color and contrast perception in a minority of patients, the study did not show significantly different results for the two IOL types.
Authors: James A Davison; Anil S Patel; Joao P Cunha; Jim Schwiegerling; Orkun Muftuoglu Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 3.117