Visual performance of a multi-zone bifocal and a progressive multifocal contact lens

CLAO Journal

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 88-93

  Guillon, Michel ^a,c   Maissa, Cecile ^a   Cooper, Philip ^a   Girard Claudon, Karine ^a   Poling, Timothy R ^b  

^a Contact Lens Research Consultants ^*  (United Kingdom)

^b JOHNSON AND JOHNSON   (United States)

^c Optometric Technology Group   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

High contrast; High luminance; Low contrast; Low luminance; Multi zone bifocal contact lens; Multifocal contact lens; Presbyopia contact lens; Visual acuity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTACT LENS; PRESBYOPIA; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY; ADULT; AGED; BINOCULAR VISION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMAN; ILLUMINATION; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; AGED; CONTACT LENSES; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; LIGHTING; MIDDLE AGED; PRESBYOPIA; VISION; VISION, BINOCULAR; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 0036527576     PISSN: 07338902     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Barr JT. The Contact Lens Spectrum Millennium Report. CL Spectrum 2000;14(1):24-30.
2. Morgan P, Efron N. Trends in UK contact lens prescribing 2000. Optician 2000;5749(219)2-23.
3. Barr JT. Contact Lenses 2000. CL Spectrum 2001;16(1):23-29.
4. Charman WN, Saunders B. Theoretical and practical factors influencing the optical performance of contact lenses for the presbyope. J Brit Contact Lens Assoc 1990;13(1):67-75.
5. Charman WN, Walsh G. Retinal images with centered, aspheric varifocal contact lenses. ICLC 1988;15(3):87-93.
6. Borish IM. Pupil dependency of bifocal contact lenses. Am J Physiol Opt 1988;65(5):417-423.
7. Young G, Grey CP, Papas EB. Simultaneous vision bifocal contact lenses: a comparative assessment of the in vitro optical performance. Optom Vis Sci 1990;67(5):339-345.
8. McGill E, Ames K, Erickson P, Robboy M. Quality of vision with hydrogel simultaneous vision bifocal contact lenses. ICLC 1987;14(12)476-482.
9. Bullimore MA, Jacobs RJ. Subjective and objective assessment of soft bifocal contact lens performance. Optom Vis Sci 1993;70(6):469-475.
10. Erickson P, Robboy M. Performance characteristics of a hydrophilic concentric bifocal contact lens. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1985;62(10):702-708.
11. Erickson P, Robboy M, Apollonio A, Jones WF. Optical design considerations for contact lens bifocals. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988;65(3):198-202.
12. Fisher K, Bauman E, Schwallie J. Evaluation of two new soft contact lenses for correction of presbyopia. ICLC 1999;26:92-101.
13. Meyler J, Veys J. A new 'pupil-intelligent' design for presbyopic correction. Optician 1999;217(5687):18-23.
14. Costes Y, Guillon M, Guillon JP. Precision of LogMAR visual acuity measurement. Optom Vis Sci 1994;71(12S):58.
15. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Physiol Opt 1976;53:740.
16. Ferris FL, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthal 1982;94:91.
17. Guillon M, Schock SE. Soft contact lens visual performance: a multicenter study. Optom Vis Sci 1991;68(2):96-103.
18. Guillon M, Guillon J-P, Shah D. Visual performance stability of disposable contact lenses. ICLC 1993;20:7-16.
19. Guillon M, Sayer G. Critical assessment of visual performance in contact lens practice. Contax 1988;May:8-13.
20. Janoff MS. A standard practice for roadway lighting based on driver performance. J Illum Eng Soc 1990;19:47-51.
21. Lloyd M. Fitting a soft disposable bifocal lens. Optician 1999;217(5691):18-22.