July 2019
Volume 60, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2019
Reading Performance with Identical and Different IOL Powers in Each Eye
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mark A Bullimore
    College of Optometry, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States
  • Rajaraman Suryakumar
    Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Mark Bullimore, Acucela (C), Alcon Laboratories. (C), CooperVision (C), Eyenovia (C), Genentech (C), Johnson & Johnson Vision (C), Novartis Pharma (C), Tear Film Innovations (C); Rajaraman Suryakumar, Alcon Laboratories (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support  Alcon Research
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2019, Vol.60, 3725. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mark A Bullimore, Rajaraman Suryakumar; Reading Performance with Identical and Different IOL Powers in Each Eye. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2019;60(9):3725.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose : To assess reading speed in patients implanted with the ReSTOR +2.5 D in both eyes and with those implanted with two different, but similar, powers in each eye—ReSTOR +2.5 D and +3.0 D.

Methods : A prospective, multi-center, randomized, double masked, parallel group post-market study was conducted involving the bilateral implantation of AcrySof ReSTOR. One group received the ReSTOR +2.5 D in both eyes (Bilateral group) and the second received the ReSTOR +2.5 D in one eye and the ReSTOR +3.0 D in the other (Contralateral group). Reading speed (words/minute) was measured using the Radner Reading Test following the manufacturer’s instructions with residual refractive error corrected. Text was read at print sizes ranging from 1.2 to –0.2 logMAR. If patients could not read any text of a given size, their reading speed was scored as 0 words/minute.

Results : A total of 89 subjects were available for analysis at their 6-month post-operative visit (46 Bilateral and 43 Contralateral). Reading speed was constant in both groups at print sizes 0.7 to 1.2 logMAR. The broad range of print sizes reflected at this constant reading speed suggests that reading proficiency was the underlying cause driving the plateau. While the contralateral group read on average 9% faster (154 vs. 141 words/minute), when normalized for peak speed, reading speed was nearly identical across all print sizes. Below the critical print size of 0.7 logMAR, reading speed decreased steadily, falling to 50% of peak speed at 0.2 logMAR.

Conclusions : Patients implanted with the ReSTOR +2.5 D in both eyes and with those implanted with two different powers in each eye had identical critical print sizes.

This abstract was presented at the 2019 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Vancouver, Canada, April 28 - May 2, 2019.


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.