Comparison of a diffractive bifocal and a monofocal intraocular lens.
OBJECTIVE
To compare a Pharmacia diffractive bifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a monofocal lens of the same design without the diffractive grating.


METHODS
Multicenter study.


METHODS
This randomized, prospective study comprised 70 patients with a monofocal IOL and 79 with a diffractive bifocal IOL. Follow-up was 5 to 6 months. Near and distance visual acuities, contract sensitivity, patient satisfaction, and spectacle use were evaluated.


RESULTS
All patients achieved a best corrected visual acuity of 0.5 or better; 80% in the monofocal and 71% in the bifocal group had a best corrected visual acuity of 1.0 or better. Without correction, 93% of the bifocal and 9% of the monofocal group could read J3 or better. With distance correction, 99% and 4%, respectively, could read J3 or better. Contrast sensitivity was slightly lower in the bifocal group at distance and near for all spatial frequencies. In the bifocal group, 46% never used spectacles for near tasks. Overall satisfaction was rated good by 86% of the monofocal and 85% of the bifocal group.


CONCLUSIONS
The diffractive bifocal IOL performed well at distance and near. Patients who no longer require spectacles will benefit significantly from a bifocal IOL, but many with a bifocal IOL in one eye will require spectacles for the fellow eye.
Allen
E D
ED
Sunderland Eye Infirmary, England.
Burton
R L
RL
Webber
S K
SK
Haaskjold
E
E
Sandvig
K
K
Jyrkkiö
H
H
Leite
E
E
Nyström
A
A
Wollensak
J
J
D000368:Aged; D002386:Cataract / Q000503:physiopathology; D002387:Cataract Extraction; D015350:Contrast Sensitivity / Q000502:physiology*; D005139:Eyeglasses; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007910:Lenses, Intraocular; D008297:Male; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011446:Prospective Studies; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology*