Abstract
Purpose :
To detect the predictors of "overall patient satisfaction" with an EDOF/+3.25 combination and compare the results to two previous cohorts with identical methods using regression analysis.
Methods :
55(EDOF/+3.25)"best case patients" with 1) 4 months neuroadaptation 2) corrected residual refractive error 3) necessary YAGs 4) aggressive ocular surface management, underwent regression analysis to identify predictors of "overall patient satisfaction". Satisfaction was regressed against 40 independent variables: - 31 clinical metrics such asincluding reading speed & accuracyacuity, angle kappa, aberrations, mesopic pupil size, residual spherical equivalent & astigmatism, near, intermediate vision at fixed & preferred focal distances, etc., & 9 responses from a subjective questionnaire evaluating the performance of everyday tasks. Results compared to two prior cohorts (67 bilat. +3.25 and 55 bilat. +4.00) with identical methods.
Results :
80% (44/55) EDOF/+3.25 were “very satisfied” and 20% (11/40) were “satisfied” compared to 82% very sat/18% sat (bilateral+3.25) and 64% very sat/36% sat (bilateral+4.00). Scores for glasses use at near trended (p=.057) in favor of the bilateral +3.25 (1.92/2.00) vs. EDOF/+3.25 (1.76/2.00). However, scores for “working on a computer” (intermediate VA) were significantly better (p=0.02) for EDOF/+3.25(4.65/5.00) vs. bilateral +3.25(4.32/5.00). Scores for distance VA also significantly (p=0.047) favored the EDOF/+3.25 cohort (4.76/5.00) vs. bilat. +3.25(4.53/5.00). In the bilateral +3.25 cohort, regression revealed that variables related to intermediate VA were responsible for outperforming the bilateral+4.00 cohort, and it also showed that smaller mesopic pupils (p=0.005) again predicted better intermediate VA as was observed in the bilateral +4.00 cohort.
Conclusions :
1) the EDOF/+3.25 combo revealed equal pt satisfaction vs. bilat +3.25 and greater vs bilat +4.00. 2)compared to the bilat +3.25 & bilat +4.00, the EDOF/+3.25 combo scored less for reading very fine print and equal for reading moderate print, while scores for uncorrected intermediate VA and distance VA were sig. better for the EDOF/+3.25 combo. 3)smaller mesopic pupils in the +3.25 eye of the combo still produced sig. better intermediate VA when the combo was tested bilaterally.
This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.