April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
A Best-Eye Model of Binocular Summation with Presbyopic Contact Lens Corrections
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Pete S Kollbaum
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Sandra Huenink
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Ryan McGiffen
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Martin Rickert
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Janice Tarrant
    CooperVision, Pleasanton, CA
  • Paul Chamberlain
    CooperVision, Pleasanton, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Pete Kollbaum, CooperVision (F); Sandra Huenink, CooperVision (F); Ryan McGiffen, CooperVision (F); Martin Rickert, CooperVision (F); Janice Tarrant, CooperVision (E); Paul Chamberlain, CooperVision (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 3745. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Pete S Kollbaum, Sandra Huenink, Ryan McGiffen, Martin Rickert, Janice Tarrant, Paul Chamberlain; A Best-Eye Model of Binocular Summation with Presbyopic Contact Lens Corrections. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):3745.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the binocular summation of presbyopic contact lens correction strategies in a subject population requiring a high near add.

Methods: Landolt-C (20/100) targets were used to measure the contrast threshold of twenty healthy, non-cyclopleged, high spectacle add (>+2.00D) subjects while wearing monovision (MV)(+0.75 and +2.00D), binocular low and high add multifocal (MF)(lotrafilcon B), and lenses which contain a low level of spherical aberration in each eye combined with +0.75D of monocular defocus in the non-dominant eye (SA+MD)(omafilcon A). Testing occurred in a custom haploscope using custom software at distance, intermediate and near target vergences. A binocular summation ratio (BSR) was calculated as the ratio of monocular performance to binocular performance. Mixed effect models were used to determine the effect of lens type conditioned on eye and viewing distance and the marginal effect of eye within each lens type.

Results: The SA+MD approach provided significantly better binocular distance CS compared to other corrections intended to correct a high add population (i.e MF high (p=0.011), MV+2.00 D (p=0.03)). The same was true for intermediate viewing distances (i.e. MF high (p=0.04), MV+2.00 D (p=0.008)). MV +2.00 D provided significantly better near CS compared to all other corrections (p<0.01), but significantly worse stereoacuity compared to all other corrections (p<0.02). BSR’s did not deviate significantly from 1. Specifically, unlike some previous reports, inhibition (BSR’s below 1) was not observed, even in the presence of large amounts of monocular defocus (i.e. MV +2.00 D).

Conclusions: The SA+MD strategy containing small amounts of spherical aberration in the presence of a small amount of defocus in the non-dominant eye provided good CS at all viewing distances, avoiding potential disadvantages of MV (introduction of larger amounts of monocular defocus) and MF (introduction of larger amounts of binocular aberration). The current data suggest a “best-eye” summation model. Further investigation is warranted to determine the effect of subject task and target stimulus on this result.

Keywords: 477 contact lens • 653 presbyopia • 434 binocular vision/stereopsis  

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.