Visual satisfaction with progressive addition lenses prescribed with novel foveal fixation axis measurements.

Progressive addition lens (PAL) prescription is usually conducted using the pupillary centre as a reference, which in general does not coincide with the visual axis (kappa distance), and this difference could induce undesired prismatic effects in far and near vision distances and adaptation problems. This study aimed to assess the impact on subjects' visual satisfaction with PALs prescribed based on foveal fixation axis (FFA) measurements. Two different PALs (LifeStyle 3i, Hoya Lens Iberia) were randomly prescribed [one with a customized inset (the difference between the FFA measurements (Ergofocus®, Lentitech, Spain) at far and near distances and the second with a standard inset (2.

Intrasession repeatability and agreement of a new method to measure the foveal fixation axis.

Purpose: Ophthalmic lens adaptation, particularly with progressive addition lenses, requires accurate measurements of the patient nasopupillary distance (NPD) and interpupillary distance (IPD), which are usually collected using the pupil centre as a reference. However, differences between the pupil centre and visual or foveal axis could induce some subsidiary effects of correcting lenses. This study aimed to assess the intrasession repeatability of a new prototype (Ergofocus®; Lentitech, Barakaldo, Spain) that can measure the foveal fixation axis (FFA) distance and assess the agreement with the NPD measurements collected using a traditional method (frame ruler).

Interdevice agreement in the measurement of physiognomy parameters and frame angles to prescribe progressive addition lenses.

Clinical Relevance: Ophthalmic lens adaptation requires accurate measurements of physiognomy parameters and frame angles, with a great impact on subject vision, especially when personalised progressive addition lenses are prescribed.

Background: The aim of this study is to describe interdevice agreement between different methods and traditional methods (frame ruler).

Methods: The agreement of the interpupillary distance, nasopupillary distance and fitting point height measured with four devices (PD-5, OptiCenter, Visioffice and a frame ruler) and of pantoscopic and frame wrap angles measured with three devices (OptiCenter, Visioffice and Essilor standard ruler) was assessed in 21 healthy volunteers, by a Bland-Altman analysis; mean difference and limits of agreement (LoA) were calculated.

Comparison of physiognomy and frame angle parameters using different devices to prescribe progressive addition lenses.

Clinical Relevance: Accurate measurement of several physiognomy parameters (interpupillary, nasopupillary and fitting height distances) and frame angles (pantoscopic and frame wrap angles) is essential for prescribing progressive addition lenses for presbyopic patients.

Background: Few reports have described the repeatability of different devices commonly used to conduct essential measurements for prescribing progressive addition lenses.

Methods: Interpupillary, nasopupillary (at far and near distances) and fitting point heights were measured three consecutive times in 21 healthy volunteers with four devices (traditional frame ruler, PD-5 interpupilometer, OptiCenter, and VisiOffice).