PURPOSE: This study examines aniseikonia, Aniseikonia tolerance range (ATR), anisometropia and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in an anisometropic population compared with a non-anisometropic population. The relationship between anisometropia and aniseikonia is determined, and the correlations between aniseikonia, anisometropia and ATR versus PRO are described. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-three patients with IOL-induced anisometropia ≥1 dioptre (D) (the anisometropic group) and 17 patients who had IOL-induced anisometropia <1 D (the control group) were included. Best corrected visual acuity, aniseikonia, ATR and stereoacuity were examined, and two questionnaires were completed: convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS) and Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-39). RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen patients had anisometropia >1 and <3 D, and 10 patients had anisometropia >3 D. There was no difference in PRO between the control group and the anisometropic group (Mann-Whitney, p-values VFQ: 0.96, CISS: 0.06). There was no correlation between anisometropia and PRO (Spearman's rank correlation test p-values: VFQ: 0.54, CISS: 0.57). Patients with low ATR were more sensitive towards anisometropia and had lower PRO than patients with high ATR (Mann-Whitney, p-values: VFQ: 0.0008, CISS: 0.11). A large tolerance of aniseikonia was observed. CONCLUSION: No correlation between PRO and anisometropia or aniseikonia was found. Patients with low ATR are at risk of visual complaints if they are exposed to IOL-induced anisometropia. ATR might be a future screening tool in cataract patients.
PURPOSE: This study examines aniseikonia, Aniseikonia tolerance range (ATR), anisometropia and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in an anisometropic population compared with a non-anisometropic population. The relationship between anisometropia and aniseikonia is determined, and the correlations between aniseikonia, anisometropia and ATR versus PRO are described. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-three patients with IOL-induced anisometropia ≥1 dioptre (D) (the anisometropic group) and 17 patients who had IOL-induced anisometropia <1 D (the control group) were included. Best corrected visual acuity, aniseikonia, ATR and stereoacuity were examined, and two questionnaires were completed: convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS) and Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-39). RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen patients had anisometropia >1 and <3 D, and 10 patients had anisometropia >3 D. There was no difference in PRO between the control group and the anisometropic group (Mann-Whitney, p-values VFQ: 0.96, CISS: 0.06). There was no correlation between anisometropia and PRO (Spearman's rank correlation test p-values: VFQ: 0.54, CISS: 0.57). Patients with low ATR were more sensitive towards anisometropia and had lower PRO than patients with high ATR (Mann-Whitney, p-values: VFQ: 0.0008, CISS: 0.11). A large tolerance of aniseikonia was observed. CONCLUSION: No correlation between PRO and anisometropia or aniseikonia was found. Patients with low ATR are at risk of visual complaints if they are exposed to IOL-induced anisometropia. ATR might be a future screening tool in cataractpatients.
Authors: Daniel Mon-López; Ricardo Bernardez-Vilaboa; Antonio Alvarez Fernandez-Balbuena; Manuel Sillero-Quintana Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 3.390