Secondary Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Visual Performance of Daily-disposable Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses

A Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Trial

Sha, Jennifer, BOptom/BSc1; Tilia, Daniel, MOptom1,2; Kho, Danny, BOptom/BSc1; Amrizal, Hamdy, BOptom/BS1; Diec, Jennie, BOptom1; Yeotikar, Nisha, BOptom, PhD1; Jong, Monica, BOptom, PhD1,2; Thomas, Varghese, MBioStat1; Bakaraju, Ravi C., BOptom, PhD, FAAO1,2*

doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001311
CLINICAL TRIALS

SIGNIFICANCE The present study highlights the differences between modern daily-disposable multifocal soft contact lenses to assist eye care practitioners in fitting presbyopic contact lens wearers.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare visual performance of three daily-disposable multifocal contact lenses.

METHODS Presbyopes (n = 72) wore 1-Day Acuvue Moist Multifocal, BioTrue ONEday for Presbyopia, and Dailies AquaComfort Plus Multifocal for 1 week in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover clinical trial. After 1 week, high- and low-contrast visual acuities (HCVA, LCVA) were measured between 6 m and 40 cm and stereopsis at 40 cm. Subjective performance was assessed with 1- to 10-point rating scales for clarity, ghosting, driving vision, vision stability, ease of focusing, overall vision satisfaction, and ocular comfort. Willingness to purchase was reported with categorical responses. Linear mixed models and χ2 tests were used for analysis, and level of significance was set at 5%.

RESULTS BioTrue provided better HCVA and LCVA at distance than did Acuvue Moist (P ≤ .03). Subjectively, Acuvue Moist was rated lowest for distance clarity, distance ghosting, and driving vision (P ≤ .05). Acuvue Moist provided better HCVA at 70 to 40 cm and LCVA at 1 m to 40 cm than did BioTrue (P ≤ .01) and better LCVA at 1 m to 50 cm than did AquaComfort Plus (P ≤ .02). AquaComfort Plus also provided better HCVA and LCVA at 50 and 40 cm than did BioTrue (P ≤ .03). Acuvue Moist provided better stereopsis than did BioTrue (P = .02). Subjectively, BioTrue was rated lowest for near clarity (P ≤ .007) and lower than Acuvue Moist for intermediate clarity and near ghosting (P ≤ .04). No other differences were found between lenses (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS BioTrue had better distance performance compared with near, whereas Acuvue Moist performed conversely. AquaComfort Plus performed reasonably overall.

1Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

2School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia *r.bakaraju@brienholdenvision.org

Submitted: March 20, 2018

Accepted: September 5, 2018

Funding/Support: None of the authors have reported funding/support.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: The Brien Holden Vision Institute receives royalties from the sale of Dailies AquaComfort Plus Multifocal contact lenses.

Study Registration Information: The trial was registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000652572) and the U.S. clinical trials registry (NCT02484586).

Author Contributions and Acknowledgments: Conceptualization: HA, RCB; Formal Analysis: VT; Investigation: JS, DT, DK, JD, NY, MJ; Methodology: JS, DT, RCB; Writing – Original Draft: JS, DK, HA; Writing – Review & Editing: DT, DK, JD, NY, MJ, VT, RCB.

The authors would like to acknowledge the clinical team (Ms. S. Delaney, Ms. A. Munro, Ms. K. Wagenfuehr, and Ms. B. Ludlow), the database management team (Dr. T. Naduvilath and Ms. K. Laarakkers), and the quality management team (Ms. J. Morgan, Dr. P. Erickson, and Mr. R. May) for their invaluable support in running this trial at the Clinical Research and Trials Centre. The authors would also like to extend their thanks to Mr. D. Falk for developing the electronic near visual acuity charts and Dr. J. Flanagan for reviewing the article. This project is funded by the Brien Holden Vision Institute.

© 2018 American Academy of Optometry