Evaluating Three Different Methods of Determining Addition in Presbyopia.
Negareh Yazdani, Abbas Azimi Khorasani, Hanieh Mirhajian Moghadam, Abbas Ali Yekta, Hadi Ostadimoghaddam, Javad Heravian Shandiz
Author Information
Negareh Yazdani: Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Refractive Errors Research Center, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Abbas Azimi Khorasani: Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Refractive Errors Research Center, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Hanieh Mirhajian Moghadam: Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Abbas Ali Yekta: Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
Hadi Ostadimoghaddam: Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Refractive Errors Research Center, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Javad Heravian Shandiz: Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Refractive Errors Research Center, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
PURPOSE: To compare three different methods for determining addition in presbyopes. METHODS: The study included 81 subjects with Presbyopia who aged 40-70 years. Reading addition values were measured using 3 approaches including the amplitude of accommodation (AA), dynamic retinoscopy (DR), and increasing plus lens (IPL). RESULTS: IPL overestimated reading addition relative to other methods. Mean near addition obtained by AA, DR and IPL were 1.31, 1.68 and 1.77, respectively. Our results showed that IPL method could provide 20/20 vision at near in the majority of presbyopic subjects (63.4%). CONCLUSION: The results were approximately the same for 3 methods and provided comparable final addition; however, mean near additions were higher with increasing plus lens compared with the other two methods. In presbyopic individuals, increasing plus lens is recommended as the least time-consuming method with the range of ±0.50 diopter at the 40 cm working distance.
