Objective: To compare the visual performance and patient-reported outcomes of three types of monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) with different asphericities. Methods: This cross-sectional, comparative study comprised of 62 pseudophakic eyes divided into three groups corresponding to the IOL that they were previously implanted with (Tecnis ZCB00 negative aspheric IOL, EnVista MX60 neutral aspheric IOL and Akreos Adapt spheric IOL). Mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), best-corrected far visual acuity (BCVA), spherical aberration (SA), contrast sensitivity (SC), halo and starburst, and responses to a qualitative questionnaire (NEI-RQL) were measured. Results: There was no significant difference in MRSE (P=0.74) and BCVA (P=0.52) among the three groups. There was a statistically significant difference (P=0.00) in mean internal (lens) SA, measured through a 5mm pupil, among Tecnis (-0.150 μm), EnVista (+0.022 μm) and Akreos Adapt (+0.094 μm). Compared to the Akreos Adapt, the Tecnis and EnVista groups had significantly better CS at 6 CPD and 12 CPD under mesopic testing without glare (P= 0.01) and at 6 CPD mesopic testing with glare (P=0.04). Halo scores were insignificant among the three groups. However, starburst scores were significantly worse in the Akreos Adapt IOL than the Tecnis and EnVista (P=0.01). There was no difference in questionnaire responses among the three groups. Conclusion The negative aspheric and neutral aspheric lenses showed significantly lower SA resulting in better CS in mesopic conditions and better starburst scores. MRSE, BCVA and subjective satisfaction were statistically similar regardless of the type of monofocal intraocular lens
Contrast Sensitivity

The effect of illumination on the contrast sensitivity function was studied using an Arden Contrast Sensitivity System and incandescent electric lamp. The intensities of illumination were set at 50,100,200,500, and 1,000 lx. The contrast sensitivity function was saturated at 500 lx of illumination in both monocular and biocular condition. But frequency charicteristics showed that the CSF was increased more at 1,000 lx of illumination at high frequency.
Contrast Sensitivity* ; Lighting*

PURPOSE: To assess visual acuity, spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity in patients who were implanted with spheric, aspheric ReSTOR(R) or Crystalens HD(R) lenses. METHODS: The present study enrolled 16 patients (32 eyes) implanted with biliateral spheric ReSTOR(R) (four patients, spheric ReSTOR group), bilateral aspheric ReSTOR(R) (seven patients, aspheric ReSTOR group) or bilateral Crystalens HD(R) (five patients, Crystalens HD group) lenses. At three months postoperatively, visual acuity, spherical aberration, and contrast sensitivity were evaluated. RESULTS: Three months after surgery, there were no significant differences in uncorrected distant or intermediate visual acuity among the three groups. Uncorrected near visual acuity in the spheric and aspheric ReSTOR groups was superior to that in the Crystalens HD group, and the aspheric ReSTOR group had less spherical aberration. Mesopic contrast sensitivity in the Crystalens HD group was significantly higher at three cycles per degree compared to those in the spheric and aspheric ReSTOR groups. CONCLUSIONS: Uncorrected near visual acuity in the Crystalens HD group was inferior to those in the spheric and aspheric ReSTOR groups, but the mesopic contrast sensitivity of the Crystalens HD group at three cycles per degree was superior to those in the spheric and aspheric ReSTOR groups.
Contrast Sensitivity ; Humans ; Visual Acuity

PURPOSE: To compare postoperative visual acuity, spherical equivalent and contrast sensitivity of eyes implanted with either spherical C-flex(TM)(570C) or aspheric C-flex(TM)(970C) intraocular lenses (IOL). METHODS: Forty eyes implanted with posterior chamber intraocular lenses were divided into two groups: C-flex(TM)(570C) (20 eyes) and C-flex(TM)(970C) (20 eyes). In these two groups, postoperative best corrected visual acuity (logMAR), spherical equivalent and contrast sensitivity was performed at one month and three months, postoperatively. RESULTS: In the spherical group, the preoperative naked visual acuity was 1.25+/-0.46 (logMAR). The best corrected visual acuity at postoperative three months was 0.49+/-0.28. In the aspheric group, the preoperative naked visual acuity was 1.29+/-0.67. The best-corrected visual acuity at postoperative three months was 0.39+/-0.30. There were statistically significant differences in best-corrected visual acuity between the preoperative and the postoperative three months results in the spherical IOL group and in the aspherical IOL group. There were no statistically significant differences in spherical equivalent between preoperative and postoperative one-month results and between preoperative and postoperative three-month results in the spherical IOL group and the aspherical IOL group. In the aspherical IOL group, contrast sensitivity at postoperative one and three months were better in the all spatial frequency than in the preoperative scotopic condition. CONCLUSIONS: When we compared eyes implanted with the spherical C-flex(TM)(970C) with eyes implanted with the spherical C-flex(TM) (570C), there were no statistically significant differences in spherical equivalent or best corrected visual acuity. The aspherical IOL group showed better contrast sensitivity than did the spherical IOL group postoperatively at both one month and three months.
Contrast Sensitivity ; Eye ; Lenses, Intraocular ; Visual Acuity

To find out the good visual environment for reading, the methods of illumination were studied using Arden Contrast Sensitivity System. Among various factors for comfortable reading condition such as air condition, temperature, humidity, noise and light, the intensity and characters of illumination were the most important factors for eye health. If the character of illuminations are fairly good, to make the brighter condition is better for eye hdalth. But in artificial illumination, there are so many limitations for supplying light of good characters. So we set the luminosity on the desk to 500 lx in which tbe best visual acuity presented, and checked the contrast sensitivity by changing the luminosity of the room. The results suggested that the condition in which luminosity on the desk was higher twice than the room was favorable for reading.
Contrast Sensitivity* ; Humidity ; Lighting* ; Noise ; Visual Acuity

PURPOSE: To compare spherical aberration, higher-order aberration, and contrast sensitivity of eyes implanted with aspheric (AcrySof IQ) or spherical (AcrySof Natural) intraocular lenses. METHOD: Seventy-five eyes implanted with posterior chamber intraocular lenses were divided into two groups: AcrySof IQ (35 eyes) and AcrySof Natural (40 eyes). Wavefront analysis (spherical, higher-order and total aberration) using iTace, and contrast sensitivity (under photopic and mesopic condition) using Optec 6500 were performed at 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. RESULT: One month after surgery, the IQ IOL (intraocular lens) group had lower values of spherical aberration (p<0.001) and higher-order aberration (p=0.048) than the Natural IOL group. The IQ IOL group also showed better contrast sensitivities at 1.5- and 3-cpd spatial frequencies in mesopic conditions. Three months after surgery, the IQ IOL group had less spherical aberration (p<0.001) and higher-order aberration (p=0.027) than the Natural IOL group and showed better contrast sensitivities at the 3-cpd spatial frequency in mesopic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Aspheric AcrySof IQ IOL induced significantly less higher-order aberration and spherical aberration than AcrySof Natural IOL. The contrast sensitivity was better under mesopic conditions in the AcrySof IQ IOL-implanted group.
Contrast Sensitivity ; Dental Porcelain ; Eye ; Lenses, Intraocular

Changes in contrast sensitivity have been demonstrated in patients with normal Snellen acuity. In an attempt to elucidate more sensitively the visual dysfunction before developement of either overt retinopathy or a reduction in Snellen acuity in patients with retinal disorders, contrast sensitivity test was performed in diabetic patients with normal Snellen acuity and control subjects matched for age and sex. The results were as follows. 1) Throughout all spatial frequencies(1.5 - 3.0 - 6.0 - 12.0 - 18.0 cpd), contrast sensitivity was significantly lower(P-value<0.01) in the diabetic eyes with retinopathy(30.7 - 49.3 - 52.5 - 16.1 - 7.8) than in the normal controls(42.5 - 84.3 - 103.0 - 60.5 - 25.1) or the diabetic eyes without retinopathy(43.1 - 92.2 - 95.8 - 43.4 - 16.4 ). 2) In high spatial frequencies(12.0 - 18.0 cpd) contrast sensitivity in the diabetic eyes without retinopathy group(43.4 - 16.4) was significantly decreased(P-value<0.01) in comparison with the normal controls(60.5 - 25.1). So, contrast sensitivity test is more sensitive test for central visual function than Snellen acuity.
Contrast Sensitivity* ; Diabetic Retinopathy* ; Humans ; Retinaldehyde

PURPOSE: To compare contrast sensitivity (CS) and glare in patients that received 4 different types of intraocular lenses with different optical edge design. METHODS: The study enrolled 120 patients (135 eyes) undergoing phacoemulsification and implantation of 4 different types of intraocular lenses with different optical edge designs. The procedure was performed by a single surgeon. The patients were tested at 2 months after surgery with ACV (Visual Capacity Analyzer, L2 Informatique, France) to measure CS and glare. RESULTS: In the patients who received LI61SE (13 eyes) and LI61U (46 eyes), we found no significant difference in glare but the patients who received LI61SE had more increased contrast sensitivity at spatial frequency 19 cpd in the monitor illuminator of 100 cd/m2 and 30 cd/m2. In patients who received MA60BM (47 eyes) and AR40e (29 eyes), we found the patients who received AR40e had more decreased glare and more increased CS at frequency 19 cpd in the monitor illuminator when it was set at 100 cd/m2 and 30 cd/m2. CONCLUSIONS: The patients who received LI61SE had more increased CS at high spatial frequency than the patients who received LI61U. The patients who received AR40e had more decreased glare and more increased CS at high spatial frequency than patients with MA60BM.
Contrast Sensitivity* ; Glare* ; Humans ; Lenses, Intraocular* ; Phacoemulsification

PURPOSE: To determine the reproducibility of morphoscopic contrast sensitivity test values in the patients with primary open angle glaucoma using the Visual Capacity Analyzer (ACV) designed for assessing full visual performance including contrast sensitivity. METHODS: Morphoscopic contrast sensitivity was measured in each five glaucomatous eyes. The measurement was repeated 5 times under two different luminance level of screen (maximum and 3 cd/m2). RESULTS: Under maximum luminance background, the coefficients of variation (CV) and the reliability coefficients (RC) for the spatial frequencies examined in this study ranged from 2.1% to 29.3%, from 92.1% to 100.0%, respectively. Under 3cd/m2 luminance level of screen, the CV ranged from 2.7% to 32.0%, and the RC ranged from 90.7% to 99.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicates that for the spatial frequencies examined, the morphoscopic contrast sensitivity test using ACV shows good reproducibility in glaucomatous patients.
Contrast Sensitivity* ; Glaucoma* ; Glaucoma, Open-Angle ; Humans

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the change of contrast sensitivity under the photopic and mesopic illumination in amblyopic patient after occlusion therapy. METHODS: The subjects comprised 32 pediatric patients with strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia who were followed up at the clinic. We measured the best corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity under the photopic and mesopic illumination using ACV instrument before and three months after occlusion therapy. RESULTS: Mean best corrected visual acuity of amblyopic eyes before occlusion therapy was 0.54 +/- 0.21. In 17 eyes with improvement in best corrected visual acuity (mean: 0.21 +/- 0.05), there was improvement in photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity (p<0.05). In 15 eyes without improvement in the best corrected visual acuity, there was no difference in photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: From above mentioned results, we can conclude that the contrast sensitivity using ACV instrument is responsive to short term (three months) occlusion therapy for amblyopic eyes.
Amblyopia ; Contrast Sensitivity* ; Humans ; Lighting ; Visual Acuity