PURPOSE: To compare functional reading acuity and speed with 2 models of accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING: Four of 12 investigative sites in a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clinical study. METHODS: In this observational study, which was part of an ongoing FDA clinical trial, the MNRead functional reading test was used to compare the reading performance of patients with bilateral Tetraflex IOLs (Group 1) and a consecutive series of patients with bilateral Crystalens IOLs (Group 2) presenting at approximately 1 year postoperatively at 4 ophthalmic practices. The 2 groups were well matched for age, sex, mean postoperative time, and mean level of postoperative corrected distance visual acuity. All examinations were scored at a central reading center. RESULTS: Group 1 comprised 96 patients and Group 2, 55 patients. Patients in Group 1 read better than those in Group 2 at print sizes of 20/63 (P = .004), 20/50 (P = .002), 20/40 (P = .001), 20/32 (P = .003), and 20/25 (P = .001). A statistically significantly higher proportion of patients in Group 1 than in Group 2 read 80 words per minute or more throughout the range of print sizes (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Near reading ability was better with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL than with the Crystalens accommodating IOL at all print sizes between 20/25 and 20/63.
PURPOSE: To compare functional reading acuity and speed with 2 models of accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING: Four of 12 investigative sites in a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clinical study. METHODS: In this observational study, which was part of an ongoing FDA clinical trial, the MNRead functional reading test was used to compare the reading performance of patients with bilateral Tetraflex IOLs (Group 1) and a consecutive series of patients with bilateral Crystalens IOLs (Group 2) presenting at approximately 1 year postoperatively at 4 ophthalmic practices. The 2 groups were well matched for age, sex, mean postoperative time, and mean level of postoperative corrected distance visual acuity. All examinations were scored at a central reading center. RESULTS: Group 1 comprised 96 patients and Group 2, 55 patients. Patients in Group 1 read better than those in Group 2 at print sizes of 20/63 (P = .004), 20/50 (P = .002), 20/40 (P = .001), 20/32 (P = .003), and 20/25 (P = .001). A statistically significantly higher proportion of patients in Group 1 than in Group 2 read 80 words per minute or more throughout the range of print sizes (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Near reading ability was better with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL than with the Crystalens accommodating IOL at all print sizes between 20/25 and 20/63.
Authors: David P Piñero; Vicente J Camps; MarIa L Ramón; Verónica Mateo; Rafael J Pérez-CambrodI Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 1.848