Accommodation in Early Presbyopes Fit with Bilateral or Unilateral Near Add

Contact lenses, the reverse Pulfrich effect, and anti-Pulfrich monovision corrections

Interocular differences in image blur can cause processing speed differences that lead to dramatic misperceptions of the distance and three-dimensional direction of moving objects. This recently discovered illusion-the reverse Pulfrich effect-is caused by optical conditions induced by monovision, a common correction for presbyopia. Fortunately, anti-Pulfrich monovision corrections, which darken the blurring lens, can eliminate the illusion for many viewing conditions. However, the reverse Pulfrich effect and the efficacy of anti-Pulfrich corrections have been demonstrated only with trial lenses. This situation should be addressed, for clinical and scientific reasons. First, it is important to replicate these effects with contact lenses, the most common method for delivering monovision. Second, trial lenses of different powers, unlike contacts, can cause large magnification differences between the eyes. To confidently attribute the reverse Pulfrich effect to interocular optical blur differences, and to ensure that previously reported effect sizes are reliable, one must control for magnification. Here, in a within-observer study with five separate experiments, we demonstrate that (1) contact lenses and trial lenses induce indistinguishable reverse Pulfrich effects, (2) anti-Pulfrich corrections are equally effective when induced by contact and trial lenses, and (3) magnification differences do not cause or impact the Pulfrich effect.

Can Tinted Lenses Be Used to Manipulate Pupil Size and Visual Performance When Wearing Multifocal Contact Lenses?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of wearing neutral density (ND) filters with different transmittance levels over multifocal contact lenses (MTF CLs) on pupil size, visual functions and the dynamic accommodative response under daylight conditions in early presbyopes.

METHODS

Seventeen individuals aged between 40 and 48 years (mean age 42.35±2.62 years) were recruited to participate in this study. This study involved a repeated-measures design with two within-subject factors: optical condition (which had five levels), and fixation distance (which had three levels). The five optical conditions were no correction (baseline), MTF CL wear, MTF CL wear + 0.3 ND filter (transmission [Tv]=48.38%), MTF CL wear + 0.6 ND filter (Tv=27.12%) and MTF CL wear + 0.9 ND filter (Tv=14.58%). The three fixation distances were 3 m, 40 cm and 20 cm. Outcome measures were pupil size, the measured accommodative response (optical aid + physiological accommodation), distance visual acuity (VA), near VA and contrast sensitivity (CS).

RESULTS

There was no effect of optical condition on the accommodative response; however, there was a significant effect of fixation distance. (Accommodative response was 0.44±0.29, 1.83±0.37 and 4.03±0.46 D for fixation distances of 3 m, 40 cm and 20 cm, respectively; p<0.05.) There was a significant effect of optical condition (p<0.05) and of fixation distance on pupil size variation (5.13±0.90 mm for 3 m, 4.71±0.92 mm for 40 cm and 4.11±1.04 mm for 20 cm; p<0.05). Optical condition had a significant effect on distance VA, near VA and CS (p<0.05). Compared to the reduction in distance VA, near VA was relatively small (two-letter reduction with 0.9 ND) and unlikely to be clinically significant.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that in a group of adults with early presbyopia, the use of ND filters enlarged pupil size. However, the combination of enlarged pupils and MTF CL did not improve distance vision, and if transmittance was reduced by 50% it resulted in decrements in vision and CS. MTF CL designs which incorporate tints, or tints that vary in darkness in response to ultraviolet exposure, should consider these findings.

Impact of monovision on dynamic accommodation of early presbyopes

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of monovision on dynamic changes in accommodation, pupil responses, spherical aberration and resultant image quality in early presbyopes.

METHODS

Refractive state, pupil size and spherical aberration levels were monitored in nine early presbyopes who exhibited some accommodation (40-50 years, mean = 42 ± 2.37 years) using a Shack-Hartmann aberrometer as a binocularly viewed stimulus stepped closer (from 2 m to 40 cm), or farther (from 40 cm to 2 m). Comparison data from two fully presbyopic (i.e. non-accommodating) subjects (ages 46 and 61 years) and two young adults (ages 26 and 29 years) were also collected. Each subject was fit with four different refractive strategies: (1) both eyes corrected for 2 m, (2) both eyes corrected for 40 cm, (3) monovision with the measured right eye corrected for 2 m and, (4) monovision with the right eye corrected for 40 cm. Monochromatic image quality was quantified using the AreaMTF metric.

RESULTS

When fit with monovision, the largest number of early presbyopes produce an accommodative response dominated by the right eye correction (distance or near) as the stimulus is abruptly changed from the retinal conjugate plane of one eye to that of the other eye. However, the accommodative responses in some early presbyopes were always dominated by the distance corrected eye, the near corrected eye, or by convergence. When the stimulus approached, the near corrected eye experienced high image quality only if there was no accommodative response. However, reduced image quality was observed if an accommodative response was initiated. Neither accommodation nor pupil response latencies were longer with monovision corrections compared with bilateral distance corrections (p > 0.05). In the early presbyopes, spherical aberration was reduced during near viewing, but primarily due to pupil miosis and not lens shape changes.

CONCLUSION

As the stimulus was abruptly changed from the retinal conjugate plane of the distance corrected eye to that of the near corrected eye, most early presbyopes fit with monovision accommodated, which resulted in a decline, not an increase in image quality in the near corrected eye. These results reveal a non-optimal accommodative strategy in early presbyopes fit with monovision.

Monovision and the Misperception of Motion

Monovision is a common prescription lens correction for presbyopia [1]. Each eye is corrected for a different distance, causing one image to be blurrier than the other. Millions of people have monovision corrections, but little is known about how interocular blur differences affect motion perception. Here, we report that blur differences cause a previously unknown motion illusion that makes people dramatically misperceive the distance and three-dimensional direction of moving objects. The effect occurs because the blurry and sharp images are processed at different speeds. For moving objects, the mismatch in processing speed causes a neural disparity, which results in the misperceptions. A variant of a 100-year-old stereo-motion phenomenon called the Pulfrich effect [2], the illusion poses an apparent paradox: blur reduces contrast, and contrast reductions are known to cause neural processing delays [3-6], but our results indicate that blurry images are processed milliseconds more quickly. We resolve the paradox with known properties of the early visual system, show that the misperceptions can be severe enough to impact public safety, and demonstrate that the misperceptions can be eliminated with novel combinations of non-invasive ophthalmic interventions. The fact that substantial perceptual errors are caused by millisecond differences in processing speed highlights the exquisite temporal calibration required for accurate perceptual estimation. The motion illusion-the reverse Pulfrich effect-and the paradigm we use to measure it should help reveal how optical and image properties impact temporal processing, an important but understudied issue in vision and visual neuroscience.