RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      Multifocal contact lenses: towards customisation?

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=O119809934

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Firstly, to determine if eyes with spherical aberration (SA) that deviates significantly from the average level underperform when fitted with a simultaneous‐imaging contact lens (CL) with a power profile calculated for an ‘average eye’. Secondly...

      Firstly, to determine if eyes with spherical aberration (SA) that deviates significantly from the average level underperform when fitted with a simultaneous‐imaging contact lens (CL) with a power profile calculated for an ‘average eye’. Secondly, to determine if CL customisation can improve image quality in these eyes after fitting with a bifocal CL.
      A statistical model of the wavefront aberration function of normal eyes was used to generate a vector of Zernike fourth‐order SA coefficients from 100 synthetic eyes. Four bifocal power profiles were modelled: centre‐near (CN) or centre‐distance (CD), and two‐zone or four‐zone. All designs had 0.1‐mm‐wide transition zones. Different levels of distance and add powers were modelled, using well‐established computational wave‐optics methods. Zone widths were optimised to obtain maximal multifocal efficiency (MFE), a metric based on the visual Strehl that synthesises the through‐focus curve in one number. The MFE was calculated for each synthetic eye coupled with each bifocal power profile.
      For an ‘average eye’, the mean MFE values were 0.33 vs 0.25 and 0.32 vs 0.29, for CN vs CD and two vs four zone designs, respectively. When the four power profiles were assessed in eyes with non‐average levels of ocular SA, the MFE decreased with higher levels of SA (eye and CL combined) for all designs. Some of this reduction in MFE could be prevented by adjusting the nominal distance and add power of the bifocal profiles to compensate for the increased or decreased level of combined SA. The four‐zone CN profile showed better tolerance for different levels of ocular SA than the two‐zone designs, but this was not true for the four‐zone CD design.
      Eyes with SA levels differing significantly from the average level underperform when fitted with simultaneous‐imaging CLs with power profiles calculated for average eyes. Our findings suggest that visual performance at distance and near when wearing bifocal CLs can be improved by using a semi‐customised approach.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼