Abstract
Purpose :
The purpose of this research study is to identify preferences of lens tint in therapeutic spectacles in patients with either glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, diabetics with and without diabetic retinopathy, or stroke history.
Methods :
Total of 91 patients were enrolled in the study, with 15 patients in each subset. Each patient was given a short survey regarding their condition and any previous filter evaluation with filter preference. Objective contrast measurements while wearing tinted lenses (yellow, orange, grey, plum, amber) was performed on all patients utilizing MARS contrast chart. Subjective measurement was done using forced choice method with all the filters being presented in random order. All research reported was conducted in compliance with Midwestern University Institutional Review Board (IRB).
Results :
Patient’s age range was from 21 to 84 years of age. 98% of all patients had never had a filter evaluation. 85% of subjects stated that only color lens use were sunglasses but every subject lacked knowledge of using tinted lenses inside to help improve comfort. Subjective preferences of filters varied greatly among the different diagnostic groups. This data shows the top filter color and percent of people within that group whom chose that color: Control – Grey 60%, Glaucoma – Yellow 46%, Stroke – Plum 53.33 %, ARMD – Amber 40%, DM – Amber 40%, DM with Retinopathy Plum 40 %. Objective findings (MARS Contrast) had an Intra Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) (r) of 0.38 with p >.01 indicating that objective and subjective findings do not have strong correlation in which color patients prefer suggesting that the color that helps with comfort might not be the best for contrast and vice versa.
Conclusions :
Our results indicate that there is a significant lack of awareness regarding comprehensive filter evaluation and wear in patients with retinal conditions. It also shows no clear objective preference patterns for any particular filter. Both of these findings were consistent with our hypothesis, that no perfect filter exists and comprehensive filter evaluation is needed to determine which filter is most appropriate for each patient. Due to the significant variation in objective and subjective findings, filter evaluations should be used to prescribe tinted filters focusing on individuals and their specific tasks. No general trends or conclusions should be drawn.
This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.