Comparison of aberrations in__ different types of progressive power lenses[1]

  • 格式:pdf
  • 大小:509.18 KB
  • 文档页数:8

Comparisonofaberrationsindifferenttypesofprogressivepowerlenses

EloyA.VillegasandPabloArtalLaboratoriodeOptica,DepartamentodeFı´sica,UniversidaddeMurcia,CampusdeEspinardo(EdificioC),Murcia,Spain

AbstractRecently,computernumericallycontrolledmachineshavepermittedthemanufactureofprogressivepowerlenses(PPLs)withdifferentdesigns.However,thepossibledifferencesinopticalperformanceamonglensdesignsarenotyetwellestablished.Inthiswork,thespatiallyresolvedaberrations,at20relevantlocations,ofthreePPLswithdifferentdesignsweremeasuredwithaHartmann–Shackwavefrontsensor.Thewavefrontaberration(WA),itsrootmeansquareerror(RMS)andthepoint-spreadfunctionwereobtained.Spatiallyresolvedplotsareshownforallaberrations,astigmatismalone,andforhigherorderaberrations.TheaverageRMSofallzonesisalsocompared,andthestandarddeviationisusedasaparametertoevaluatethelevelofhard-softdesign.WefinddifferencesinthespatialdistributionoftheaberrationsbutnotintheglobalRMS,indicatingthatcurrentPPLsarerathersimilartoawaterbed,withtheaberrationsbeingthewater:theycanbemovedbuttheycannotbeeliminated.

Keywords:currentdesigns,Hartmann-Shacksensor,opticalperformance,progressiveadditionlenses,progressivepowerlenses,wavefrontaberration

IntroductionProgressiveadditionlenses(PALs)or,aswewillrefertothemwithinthispaper,progressivepowerlenses(PPLs)areacommonandsuccessfulopticalsolutionforpresbyopia.ManydifferenttypesofPPLshavebeendesignedandmanufacturedsincethistechnologybecameavailableinthe1950s.AproblemofPPLsisthepresenceofperipheralastigmatisminducedbythecontinuouschangeinpowerthroughthelens.Astig-matismdegradesvisionthroughsomepartsofthelensandmayplayaroleinreducingthesuccessoftheadaptationprocess.Thisissuewaswellrecognizedfromtheearlydays:Minkwitz(1963)statedthatitwasnotpossibletoproduceaprogressivesphericalpowersurfacewithoutastigmatismanddistortionbeingpre-sentatsomepoint.Despitenumericalcontrollathe

machinesbeingabletogenerateasphericsurfacesections,whichminimizeperipheralastigmatism,currentPPLdesignsstillpresentsignificantamountsofthisaberration.Beyondastigmatism,theimpactofotherhigherorderaberrationsinPPLshasbeenmuchlessstudied.Inarecentstudy(VillegasandArtal,2003),wemeasuredwave-aberrationsatdifferentlocationsofaPPLandthecouplingwiththeaberrationsoftheeye.Inadditiontoastigmatism,smallamountsofotheraber-rations,mainlycomaandtrefoil,werealsopresentinthelens.ThePPLdesignsarecommonlydescribedaccordingtotheastigmatismdistributionovertheprogressivesurface.PPLsaregroupedintoeitherhardorsoftprogressivedesigns(Jalie,2001).Thelenseswithharddesignhavewideastigmatism-freefarandnearvisionareas,butastigmatismrapidlyincreasesawayfromthecorridorintheintermediatezones.Inthesoftdesign,theastigmatism-freefarandnearareasarenarrowerbutareintroducedatamoregradualpace,withaslowerincreaseofastigmatisminlateralzones.FirstgenerationPPLshadasymmetricaldistributionofastigmatismaroundthecorridor(symmetricdesign).However,sinceinnormalbinocularvisiontheeyesmoveaslightly

Received:30September2003Revisedform:29March2004Accepted:19April2004

Correspondenceandreprintrequeststo:EloyA.Villegas.E-mailaddress:villegas@um.es

Ophthal.Physiol.Opt.200424:419–426ª2004TheCollegeofOptometrists419largerdistanceonthetemporalsideofalensthanonthenasalside,anasymmetricdesignwasproposedinwhichastigmatismchangedmoregraduallytowardsthetem-poralareaofthelenses(Tunnacliffe,1995).Moreover,formostPPLdesigns,thedistributionofunwantedastigmatismvarieswiththeadditionpower.SubjectiveassessmentofPPLsiscommonlyunderta-kenintwoways,bypsychophysicalmeasurements(SullivanandFowler,1989)orbysurveystoevaluatepatientacceptanceandsatisfaction(Choetal.,1991:Gresset,1991).Theseexperimentsrequirethe

collaborationofthesubjects.Inparticular,obtainingaccuratepsychophysicalresultsistime-consuming.Althoughthesurveysareoftenquiteusefulforcom-paringdifferentPPLs,thelackofcontrolovertheprocessmayleadtobiasedresults.However,differentPPLscanbemeasuredusinglensmeters(Sheedyetal.,1987;DiepesandTameling,1988)toobtainthedistri-butionofthepowerandastigmatism.Inthesestudies,significantdifferencesbetweenvarioustypesofPPLswerefound.Arecentwork(Hanetal.,2003)suggeststhateyeandheadmovementsmayattimesdiscriminatebetweendifferentdesignsofPPLs.AlthoughmanyauthorshaveproposeddifferentopticalmethodsfordesigningandevaluatingPPLs(FowlerandSullivan,1989;Bourdoncleetal.,1992;Rosenblumetal.,1992;AtchisonandKris,1993;Castellinietal.,1994;Liu,1994;Burns,1995;Alonsoetal.,1997;Loosetal.,1998;SpiersandHull,2000;Quirogaetal.,2001),thereisasignificantlackofstudiespresentingobjectivemeasurementsondifferentPPLdesigns.Inthiscontext,wehavemeasuredspatiallyresolvedwavefrontaberrations(WA)incentralandperipherallocations(upto±20°fromfartonearareas)ofthreedifferenttypesofPPLcurrentlyavailable.Aberrationsandopticalqualityparametersarecom-paredandabriefdiscussiononthedesignphilosophyofthedifferentlensesisalsoincluded.