Optometry & Vision Science

Skip Navigation LinksHome > November 2012 - Volume 89 - Issue 11 > Comparison of Three Techniques in Measuring Progressive Addi...
Optometry & Vision Science:
doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31826ca26b
Feature Article on Line

Comparison of Three Techniques in Measuring Progressive Addition Lenses

Huang, Ching-Yao*; Raasch, Thomas W.; Yi, Allen Y.*; Sheedy, James E.; Andre, Brett; Bullimore, Mark A.§

Collapse Box

Abstract

Purpose: To measure progressive addition lenses (PALs) by three techniques and to compare the differences across techniques.

Methods: Five contemporary PALs (Varilux Comfort Enhanced, Varilux Physio Enhanced, Hoya Lifestyle, Shamir Autograph, and Zeiss individual) with plano distance power and a +2.00 diopters (D) add were evaluated under the condition of lateral displacement of the lens (no rotation and no tilt) using three methods. A Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor (HSWFS) on a custom-built optical bench was used to capture and measure wavefront aberrations. A Rotlex Class Plus lens analyzer operating as a moiré interferometer was used to measure spherical and cylindrical powers. A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to measure front and back surfaces of PALs and converted to desired optical properties. The data were analyzed with MATLAB programs. Contour plots of spherical equivalent power, cylindrical power, and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) in all PALs were generated to compare their differences.

Results: The differences in spherical equivalent and cylinder at distance, near, and progressive corridor areas among the HSWFS, Rotlex, and CMM methods were close to zero in all five PALs. The maximum differences are approximately 0.50 D and located below the near power zone and the edge areas of the lens when comparing the HSWFS and CMM with the Rotlex. HOAs measured both by the HSWFS and CMM were highest in the corridor area and the area surrounding the near zone in all PALs. The HOAs measured by the CMM were lower than those from the HSWFS by 0.02 to 0.04 μm.

Conclusions: The three measurement methods are comparable for measuring spherical and cylindrical power across PALs. The non-optical method, CMM, can be used to evaluate the optical properties of a PAL by measuring front and back surface height measurements, although its estimates of HOAs are lower than those from the HSWFS.

© 2012 American Academy of Optometry

Login

Article Tools

Share

Article Level Metrics

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.