OphSourceHomeJournal CollectionOphSource ShopEvents
Journal Home
Search for

Volume 111, Issue 10, Pages 1832-1839.e2 (October 2004)


View previous. 6 of 35 View next.

Effectiveness of multifocal intraocular lenses to correct presbyopia after cataract surgery: A randomized controlled trial

Presented in part at: XXth Congress of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons, September 11, 2002; Nice, France.

Marjan D. Nijkamp, PhD1,2Corresponding Author Informationemail address, Maria G.T. Dolders, MHSc2,3, John de Brabander, PhD1,4,5, Bart van den Borne, PhD2,6, Fred Hendrikse, MD, PhD1,4,5, Rudy M.M.A. Nuijts, MD, PhD1,4,5

Received 13 January 2003; accepted 20 May 2004.

Refers to erratum:
Effectiveness of multifocal intraocular lenses to correct presbyopia after cataract surgery: A randomized controlled trial
Ophthalmology
November 2004 (Vol. 111, Issue 11, Page 2022)
Full Text | Full-Text PDF (39 KB)
Purpose

Although monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) are effective in improving vision after cataract surgery, the loss of accommodation is not restored by implantation of these IOLs. Because multifocal IOLs may improve uncorrected distance and near vision, we compared the clinical outcome and patient satisfaction after implantation of monofocal and multifocal IOLs. Sociodemographics, eagerness for spectacle independence (ESI), and neuroticism were tested as predictors of satisfaction.

Design

Randomized controlled trial.

Participants

Cataract patients with no ocular comorbidity were operated from August 1999 to January 2001; 75 patients were implanted with monofocal IOLs, and 78 with multifocal IOLs.

Methods

Assessments were made preoperatively (t1), 3 months after first-eye surgery (t2), and 3 months after second-eye surgery (t3). Primary outcomes were obtained by ophthalmic tests, whereas secondary outcomes were examined by interviews.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcomes consisted of near and distance visual acuity (VA). Secondary outcomes related to spectacle dependence, vision-related functioning, and patient satisfaction.

Results

At t3, multifocal IOLs showed significantly better uncorrected near VA than monofocal IOLs (P<0.01) and an increase in quality ratings of unaided near vision between t1 and t3 (on a scale of 1–5: 1.6 at t1 vs. 2.9 at t3, P<0.001). At t2 and t3, patients with multifocal IOLs were more likely to “never” or “only now and then” wear spectacles for near and distance than patients with monofocal IOLs (at t3, 42.7% multifocal vs. 21.6% monofocal for near [P = 0.002] and 75.0% multifocal vs. 46.2% monofocal for distance [P = 0.001]). On a 0- to 15-point scale, monofocal IOL patients showed fewer complaints from cataract symptoms, including halos and distorted vision, at t3 (1.2 monofocal vs. 2.1 multifocal [P = 0.002]). Satisfaction related to preoperative expectations was similar in the monofocal and multifocal groups. The perceived quality of corrected near vision had the strongest relationship with patient satisfaction (β = 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.060–0.523). Sociodemographics, ESI, and neuroticism did not predict patient satisfaction.

Conclusions

Overall, patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups of monofocal and multifocal IOLs. Independent of ESI or neuroticism scores, success of both IOLs depends on preoperative expectations and postoperative quality of aided near vision.

This article contains additional online-only material available at http://www.ophsource.com/periodicals/ophtha.

1 Eye Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands

2 Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

3 Department of Health Organisation, Policy and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

4 Department of Ophthalmology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

5 Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands

6 Department of Health Education and Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence and reprint requests to Marjan D. Nijkamp, PhD, Department of Health Education and Health Promotion, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands

 Manuscript no. 230008.

 The work was funded by the Eye Research Institute Maastricht (Maastricht, The Netherlands), which was not involved in any part of the study in any other way.

 None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any product or device mentioned.

PII: S0161-6420(04)00845-0

doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.05.023


View previous. 6 of 35 View next.