Patient-Reported Outcomes/Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence with Blended or Bilateral Multifocal Intraocular...

Area of Science:

• Ophthalmology
• Biomedical Engineering
• Vision Science

Background:

• Cataract surgery frequently involves multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation to restore vision at multiple distances.
• Patient satisfaction and visual outcomes depend on IOL type and implantation strategy.
• Comparing different multifocal IOLs and implantation methods is crucial for optimizing surgical results.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction after multifocal IOL implantation.
• To evaluate outcomes in three distinct IOL groups: bilateral same IOL, bilateral same IOL with mini-monovision, and blended vision with different IOLs.

Main Methods:

• A questionnaire assessed PROs and satisfaction in 219 patients 2 months post-cataract surgery.
• Group 1: Bilateral AcrySof ReSTOR 3.0 IOLs (n=78).
• Group 2: 2.5 mini-monovision with ReSTOR ActiveFocus 2.5 or toric IOLs (n=102).
• Group 3: Blended vision with ReSTOR 2.5 (dominant eye) and ReSTOR 3.0 (non-dominant eye) IOLs (n=89).

Main Results:

• Overall PROs and satisfaction were comparable across all three groups.
• The 2.5 mini-monovision group reported significantly better intermediate vision.
• Fewer patients in the 2.5 mini-monovision group experienced glare and halo compared to the 3.0/3.0 group (P<0.0001).
• Refractive outcomes and accuracy were similar among groups and did not significantly impact PROs.

Conclusions:

• Mini-monovision with 2.5 IOLs leads to higher patient satisfaction with intermediate vision compared to bilateral ReSTOR 3.0 or blended 2.5/3.0 vision.
• Despite specific visual advantages, overall PROs did not show statistically significant differences between the groups.
• No new safety concerns were identified with any of the multifocal IOL implantation strategies.