Accommodating intraocular lenses:a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods

The correction of presbyopia and restoration of true accommodative function to the ageing eye is the focus of much ongoing research and clinical work. A range of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs) implanted during cataract surgery has been developed and they are designed to change either their position or shape in response to ciliary muscle contraction to generate an increase in dioptric power. Two main design concepts exist. First, axial shift concepts rely on anterior axial movement of one or two optics creating accommodative ability. Second, curvature change designs are designed to provide significant amplitudes of accommodation with little physical displacement. Single-optic devices have been used most widely, although the true accommodative ability provided by forward shift of the optic appears limited and recent findings indicate that alternative factors such as flexing of the optic to alter ocular aberrations may be responsible for the enhanced near vision reported in published studies. Techniques for analysing the performance of AIOLs have not been standardised and clinical studies have reported findings using a wide range of both subjective and objective methods, making it difficult to gauge the success of these implants. There is a need for longitudinal studies using objective methods to assess long-term performance of AIOLs and to determine if true accommodation is restored by the designs available. While dual-optic and curvature change IOLs are designed to provide greater amplitudes of accommodation than is possible with single-optic devices, several of these implants are in the early stages of development and require significant further work before human use is possible. A number of challenges remain and must be addressed before the ultimate goal of restoring youthful levels of accommodation to the presbyopic eye can be achieved.

Development of a near activity visual questionnaire to assess accommodating intraocular lenses

Purpose: To develop a questionnaire that subjectively assesses near visual function in patients with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: A literature search of existing vision-related quality-of-life instruments identified all questions relating to near visual tasks. Questions were combined if repeated in multiple instruments. Further relevant questions were added and item interpretation confirmed through multidisciplinary consultation and focus groups. A preliminary 19-item questionnaire was presented to 22 subjects at their 4-week visit post first eye phacoemulsification with 'accommodative' IOL implantation, and again 6 and 12 weeks post-operatively. Rasch Analysis, Frequency of Endorsement, and tests of normality (skew and kurtosis) were used to reduce the instrument. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) were determined for the final questionnaire. Construct validity was obtained by Pearson's product moment correlation (PPMC) of questionnaire scores to reading acuity (RA) and to Critical Print Size (CPS) reading speed. Criterion validity was obtained by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and dimensionality of the questionnaire was assessed by factor analysis. Results: Rasch Analysis eliminated nine items due to poor fit statistics. The final items have good separation (2.55), internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.97) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.66). PPMC of questionnaire scores with RA was 0.33, and with CPS reading speed was 0.08. Area under the ROC curve was 0.88 and Factor Analysis revealed one principal factor. Conclusion: The pilot data indicates the questionnaire to be internally consistent, reliable and a valid instrument that could be useful for assessing near visual function in patients with 'accommodating' IOLS. The questionnaire will now be expanded to include other types of presbyopic correction. © 2007 British Contact Lens Association.

Intraocular lenses in the 21st century

Editorial

Requirement for and optimisation of premium intraocular lenses

Premium intraocular lenses (IOLs) aim to surgically correct astigmatism and presbyopia following cataract extraction, optimising vision and eliminating the need for cataract surgery in later years. It is usual to fully correct astigmatism and to provide visual correction for distance and near when prescribing spectacles and contact lenses, however for correction with the lens implanted during cataract surgery, patients are required to purchase the premium IOLs and pay surgery fees outside the National Health Service in the UK. The benefit of using toric IOLs was thus demonstrated, both in standard visual tests and real-world situations. Orientation of toric IOLs during implantation is critical and the benefit of using conjunctival blood vessels for alignment was shown. The issue of centration of IOLs relative to the pupil was also investigated, showing changes with the amount of dilation and repeat dilation evaluation, which must be considered during surgery to optimize the visual performance of premium IOLs. Presbyopia is a global issue, of growing importance as life expectancy increases, with no real long-term cure. Despite enhanced lifestyles, changes in diet and improved medical care, presbyopia still presents in modern life as a significant visual impairment. The onset of presbyopia was found to vary with risk factors including alcohol consumption, smoking, UV exposure and even weight as well as age. A new technique to make measurement of accommodation more objective and robust was explored, although needs for further design modifications were identified. Due to dysphotopsia and lack of intermediate vision through most multifocal IOL designs, the development of a trifocal IOL was shown to minimize these aspects. The current thesis, therefore, emphasises the challenges of premium IOL surgery and need for refinement for optimum visual outcome in addition to outlining how premium IOLs may provide long-term and successful correction of astigmatism and presbyopia.

Evaluation of modern intraocular lenses

Accommodating Intraocular Lenses (IOLs), multifocal IOLs (MIOLs) and toric IOLs are designed to provide a greater level of spectacle independency post cataract surgery. All of these IOLs are reliant on the accurate calculation of intraocular lens power determined through reliable ocular biometry. A standardised defocus area metric and reading performance index metric were devised for the evaluation of the range of focus and the reading ability of subjects implanted with presbyopic correcting IOLs. The range of clear vision after implantation of an MIOL is extended by a second focal point; however, this results in the prevalence of dysphotopsia. A bespoke halometer was designed and validated to assess this photopic phenomenon. There is a lack of standardisation in the methods used for determining IOL orientation and thus rotation. A repeatable, objective method was developed to allow the accurate assessment of IOL rotation, which was used to determine the rotational and positional stability of a closed loop haptic IOL. A new commercially available biometry device was validated for use with subjects prior to cataract surgery. The optical low coherence reflectometry instrument proved to be a valid method for assessing ocular biometry and covered a wider range of ocular parameters in comparison with previous instruments. The advantages of MIOLs were shown to include an extended range of clear vision translating into greater reading ability. However, an increased prevalence of dysphotopsia was shown with a bespoke halometer, which was dependent on the MIOL optic design. Implantation of a single optic accommodating IOL did not improve reading ability but achieved high subjective ratings of near vision. The closed-loop haptic IOL displayed excellent rotational stability in the late period but relatively poor rotational stability in the early period post implantation. The orientation error was compounded by the high frequency of positional misalignment leading to an extensive overall misalignment of the IOL. This thesis demonstrates the functionality of new IOL lens designs and the importance of standardised testing methods, thus providing a greater understanding of the consequences of implanting these IOLs. Consequently, the findings of the thesis will influence future designs of IOLs and testing methods.

Evaluating techniques to improve visual performance with and assessment of premium intraocular lenses

Premium Intraocular Lenses (IOLs) such as toric IOLs, multifocal IOLs (MIOLs) and accommodating IOLs (AIOLs) can provide better refractive and visual outcomes compared to standard monofocal designs, leading to greater levels of post-operative spectacle independence. The principal theme of this thesis relates to the development of new assessment techniques that can help to improve future premium IOL design. IOLs designed to correct astigmatism form the focus of the first part of the thesis. A novel toric IOL design was devised to decrease the effect of toric rotation on patient visual acuity, but found to have neither a beneficial or detrimental impact on visual acuity retention. IOL tilt, like rotation, may curtail visual performance; however current IOL tilt measurement techniques require the use of specialist equipment not readily available in most ophthalmological clinics. Thus a new idea that applied Pythagoras’s theory to digital images of IOL optic symmetricality in order to calculate tilt was proposed, and shown to be both accurate and highly repeatable. A literature review revealed little information on the relationship between IOL tilt, decentration and rotation and so this was examined. A poor correlation between these factors was found, indicating they occur independently of each other. Next, presbyopia correcting IOLs were investigated. The light distribution of different MIOLs and an AIOL was assessed using perimetry, to establish whether this could be used to inform optimal IOL design. Anticipated differences in threshold sensitivity between IOLs were not however found, thus perimetry was concluded to be ineffective in mapping retinal projection of blur. The observed difference between subjective and objective measures of accommodation, arising from the influence of pseudoaccommodative factors, was explored next to establish how much additional objective power would be required to restore the eye’s focus with AIOLs. Blur tolerance was found to be the key contributor to the ocular depth of focus, with an approximate dioptric influence of 0.60D. Our understanding of MIOLs may be limited by the need for subjective defocus curves, which are lengthy and do not permit important additional measures to be undertaken. The use of aberrometry to provide faster objective defocus curves was examined. Although subjective and objective measures related well, the peaks of the MIOL defocus curve profile were not evident with objective prediction of acuity, indicating a need for further refinement of visual quality metrics based on ocular aberrations. The experiments detailed in the thesis evaluate methods to improve visual performance with toric IOLs. They also investigate new techniques to allow more rapid post-operative assessment of premium IOLs, which could allow greater insights to be obtained into several aspects of visual quality, in order to optimise future IOL design and ultimately enhance patient satisfaction.

Clinical techniques to assess the visual and optical performance of intraocular lenses:a review

A number of clinical techniques are available to assess the visual and optical performance of the eye. This report aims to review the advantages and limitations of techniques used in previous studies of patients implanted with intraocular lenses (IOLs), whose designs are ever increasing in optical complexity. Although useful, in-vitro measurements of IOL optical quality cannot account for the wide range of biological variation in ocular anatomy and corneal optics, which will impact on the visual outcome achieved. This further highlights the need for a standardised series of visual performance tests that can be applied to a wide range of IOL designs. The conclusions of this report intend to assistresearchers in developing a comprehensive series of investigations to evaluate IOL performance. Repeatable and reproducible in-vivo assessments of visual and optical performance are desirable to further develop IOL concepts and designs, in the hope of improving current postoperative visual satisfaction. © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Multifocal intraocular lens differentiation using defocus curves

Purpose: To determine the most appropriate analysis technique for the differentiation of multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) designs using defocus curve assessment of visual capability.Methods:Four groups of fifteen subjects were implanted bilaterally with either monofocal intraocular lenses, refractive MIOLs, diffractive MIOLs, or a combination of refractive and diffractive MIOLs. Defocus curves between -5.0D and +1.5D were evaluated using an absolute and relative depth-of-focus method, the direct comparison method and a new 'Area-of-focus' metric. The results were correlated with a subjective perception of near and intermediate vision. Results:Neither depth-of-focus method of analysis were sensitive enough to differentiate between MIOL groups (p>0.05). The direct comparison method indicated that the refractive MIOL group performed better at +1.00, -1.00 and -1.50 D and worse at -3.00, -3.50, -4.00 and -5.00D compared to the diffractive MIOL group (p

Subjective and objective performance of the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lens

Aim: To determine whether eyes implanted with the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lenses (IOLs) have improved subjective and objective focusing performance compared to a standard monofocal IOLs. Methods: 28 participants were implanted monocularly with a KH-3500 " accommodative" IOL and 20 controls with a Softec1 IOL. Outcome measures of refraction, visual acuity, subjective amplitude of accommodation, objective accommodative stimulus response curve, aberrometry, and Scheimpflug imaging were taken at ∼3 weeks and repeated after 6 months. Results: Best corrected acuity with the KH-3500 was 0.06 (SD 0.13) logMAR at distance and 0.58 (0.20) logMAR at near. Accommodation was 0.39 (0.53) D measured objectively and 3.1 (1.6) D subjectively. Higher order aberrations were 0.87 (0.85) μm and lower order were 0.24 (0.39) μm. Posterior subcapsular light scatter was 0.95% (1.37%) greater than IOL clarity. In comparison, all control group measures were similar except objective (0.17 (0.13) D; p = 0.032) and subjective (2.0 (0.9) D; p = 0.009) amplitude of accommodation. Six months following surgery, posterior subcapsular scatter had increased (p<0.01) in the KH-3500 implanted subjects and near word acuity had decreased (p<0.05). Conclusions: The objective accommodating effects of the KH-3500 IOL appear to be limited, although the subjective and objective accommodative range is significantly increased compared to control subjects implanted with conventional IOLs. However, this "accommodative" ability of the lens appears to have decreased by 6 months post-surgery.

Objective accommodative amplitude and dynamics with the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens

PURPOSE. To compare the objective accommodative amplitude and dynamics of eyes implanted with the one-compartment-unit (1CU; HumanOptics AG, Erlangen, Germany) accommodative intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that measured subjectively. METHODS. Twenty eyes with a 1CU accommodative IOL implanted were refracted and distance and near acuity measured with a logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) chart. The objective accommodative stimulus-response curve for static targets between 0.17 and 4.00 D accommodative demand was measured with the SRW-5000 (Shin-Nippon Commerce Inc., Tokyo, Japan) and PowerRefractor (PlusOptiX, Nürnberg, Germany) autorefractors. Continuous objective recording of dynamic accommodation was measured with the SRW-5000, with the subject viewing a target moving from 0 to 2.50 D at 0.3 Hz through a Badal lens system. Wavefront aberrometry measures (Zywave; Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY) were made through undilated pupils. Subjective amplitude of accommodation was measured with the RAF (Royal Air Force accommodation and vergence measurement) rule. RESULTS. Four months after implantation best-corrected acuity was -0.01 ± 0.16 logMAR at distance and 0.60 ± 0.09 logMAR at near. Objectively, the static amplitude of accommodation was 0.72 ± 0.38 D. The average dynamic amplitude of accommodation was 0.71 ± 0.47 D, with a lag behind the target of 0.50 ± 0.48 seconds. Aberrometry showed a decrease in power of the lens-eye combination from the center to the periphery in all subjects (on average, -0.38 ± 0.28 D/mm). Subjective amplitude of accommodation was 2.24 ± 0.42 D. Two years after 1CU implantation, refractive error and distance visual acuity remained relatively stable, but near visual acuity, and the subjective and objective amplitudes of accommodation decreased. CONCLUSIONS. The objective accommodating effects of the 1CU lens appear to be limited, although patients are able to track a moving target. Subjective and objective accommodation was reduced at the 2-year follow-up. The greater subjective amplitude of accommodation is likely to result from the eye's depth of focus of and the aspheric nature of the IOL. Copyright © Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

Impact in contact lenses and the anterior eye:challenges prevailing in 2015

As we settle into a new year, this second issue of Contact Lens and Anterior Eye allows us to reflect on how new research in this field impacts our understanding, but more importantly, how we use this evidence basis to enhance our day to day practice, to educate the next generation of students and to construct the research studies to deepen our knowledge still further. The end of 2014 saw the publication of the UK governments Research Exercise Framework (REF) which ranks Universities in terms of their outputs (which includes their paper, publications and research income), environment (infrastructure and staff support) and for the first time impact (defined as “any effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia” [8]). The REF is a process of expert review, carried out in 36 subject-based units of assessment, of which our field is typically submitted to the Allied Health, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy panel. Universities that offer Optometry did very well with Cardiff, Manchester and Aston in the top 10% out of the 94 Universities that submitted to this panel (Grade point Average ranked order). While the format of the new exercise (probably in 2010) to allocate the more than £2 billion of UK government research funds is yet to be determined, it is already rumoured that impact will contribute an even larger proportion to the weighting. Hence it is even more important to reflect on the impact of our research. In this issue, Elisseef and colleagues [5] examine the intriguing potential of modifying a lens surface to allow it to bind to known wetting agents (in this case hyaluronic acid) to enhance water retention. Such a technique has the capacity to reduced friction between the lens surface and the eyelids/ocular surface, presumably leading to higher comfort and less reason for patients to discontinue with lens wear. Several papers in this issue report on the validity of new high precision, fast scanning imaging and quantification equipment, utilising techniques such as Scheimpflug, partial coherence interferometry, aberrometry and video allowing detailed assessment of anterior chamber biometry, corneal topography, corneal biomechanics, peripheral refraction, ocular aberrations and lens fit. The challenge is how to use this advanced instrumentation which is becoming increasingly available to create real impact. Many challenges in contact lenses and the anterior eye still prevail in 2015 such as: -While contact lens and refractive surgery complications are relatively rare, they are still too often devastating to the individual and their quality of life (such as the impact and prognosis of patients with Acanthmoeba Keratitis reported by Jhanji and colleagues in this issue [7]). How can we detect those patients who are going to be affected and what modifications do we need to make to contact lenses and patient management prevent this occurring? -Drop out from contact lenses still occurs at a rapid rate and symptoms of dry eye seem to be the leading cause driving this discontinuation of wear [1] and [2]. What design, coating, material and lubricant release mechanism will make a step change in end of day comfort in particular? -Presbyopia is a major challenge to hassle free quality vision and is one of the first signs of ageing noticed by many people. As an emmetrope approaching presbyopia, I have a vested interest in new medical devices that will give me high quality vision at all distances when my arms won’t stretch any further. Perhaps a new definition of presbyopia could be when you start to orientate your smartphone in the landscape direction to gain the small increase in print size needed to read! Effective accommodating intraocular lenses that truly mimic the pre-presbyopic crystalline lenses are still a way off [3] and hence simultaneous images achieved through contact lenses, intraocular lenses or refractive surgery still have a secure future. However, splitting light reaching the retina and requiring the brain to supress blurred images will always be a compromise on contrast sensitivity and is liable to cause dysphotopsia; so how will new designs account for differences in a patient's task demands and own optical aberrations to allow focused patient selection, optimising satisfaction? -Drug delivery from contact lenses offers much in terms of compliance and quality of life for patients with chronic ocular conditions such as glaucoma, dry eye and perhaps in the future, dry age-related macular degeneration; but scientific proof-of-concept publications (see EIShaer et al. [6]) have not yet led to commercial products. Part of this is presumably the regulatory complexity of combining a medical device (the contact lens) and a pharmaceutical agent. Will 2015 be the year when this innovation finally becomes a reality for patients, bringing them an enhanced quality of life through their eye care practitioners and allowing researchers to further validate the use of pharmaceutical contact lenses and propose enhancements as the technology matures? -Last, but no means least is the field of myopia control, the topic of the first day of the BCLA's Conference in Liverpool, June 6–9th 2015. The epidemic of myopia is a blight, particularly in Asia, with significant concerns over sight threatening pathology resulting from the elongated eye. This is a field where real impact is already being realised through new soft contact lens optics, orthokeratology and low dose pharmaceuticals [4], but we still need to be able to better predict which technique will work best for an individual and to develop new techniques to retard myopia progression in those who don’t respond to current treatments, without increasing their risk of complications or the treatment impacting their quality of life So what will your New Year's resolution be to make 2015 a year of real impact, whether by advancing science or applying the findings published in journals such as Contact Lens and Anterior Eye to make a real difference to your patients’ lives?

Can aberrometry provide rapid and reliable measures of subjective depth of focus following multifocal intraocular lens implantation?

Purpose: To determine whether the ‘through-focus’ aberrations of a multifocal and accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) implanted patient can be used to provide rapid and reliable measures of their subjective range of clear vision. Methods: Eyes that had been implanted with a concentric (n = 8), segmented (n = 10) or accommodating (n = 6) intraocular lenses (mean age 62.9 ± 8.9 years; range 46-79 years) for over a year underwent simultaneous monocular subjective (electronic logMAR test chart at 4m with letters randomised between presentations) and objective (Aston open-field aberrometer) defocus curve testing for levels of defocus between +1.50 to -5.00DS in -0.50DS steps, in a randomised order. Pupil size and ocular aberration (a combination of the patient’s and the defocus inducing lens aberrations) at each level of blur was measured by the aberrometer. Visual acuity was measured subjectively at each level of defocus to determine the traditional defocus curve. Objective acuity was predicted using image quality metrics. Results: The range of clear focus differed between the three IOL types (F=15.506, P=0.001) as well as between subjective and objective defocus curves (F=6.685, p=0.049). There was no statistically significant difference between subjective and objective defocus curves in the segmented or concentric ring MIOL group (P>0.05). However a difference was found between the two measures and the accommodating IOL group (P<0.001). Mean Delta logMAR (predicted minus measured logMAR) across all target vergences was -0.06 ± 0.19 logMAR. Predicted logMAR defocus curves for the multifocal IOLs did not show a near vision addition peak, unlike the subjective measurement of visual acuity. However, there was a strong positive correlation between measured and predicted logMAR for all three IOLs (Pearson’s correlation: P<0.001). Conclusions: Current subjective procedures are lengthy and do not enable important additional measures such as defocus curves under differently luminance or contrast levels to be assessed, which may limit our understanding of MIOL performance in real-world conditions. In general objective aberrometry measures correlated well with the subjective assessment indicating the relative robustness of this technique in evaluating post-operative success with segmented and concentric ring MIOL.

Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of an open-field autorefractor compared with subjective refraction in pseudophakes and hence its ability to assess objective eye focus with intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Objective refraction was measured at 6 m using the Shin-Nippon NVision-K 5001/Grand Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractor (five repeats) and by subjective refraction on 141 eyes implanted with a spherical (Softec1 n=53), aspherical (SoftecHD n=37) or accommodating (1CU n=22; Tetraflex n=29) IOL. Autorefraction was repeated 2 months later. Results: The autorefractor prescription was similar (average difference: 0.09±0.53 D; p=0.19) to that found by subjective refraction, with ~71% within ±0.50 D. The horizontal cylindrical components were similar (difference: 0.00±0.39 D; p=0.96), although the oblique (J45) autorefractor cylindrical vector was slightly more negative (by -0.06±0.25 D; p=0.06) than the subjective refraction. The results were similar for each of the IOL designs except for the spherical IOL, where the mean spherical equivalent difference between autorefraction and subjective was more hypermetropic than the Tetraflex accommodating IOL (F=2.77, p=0.04). The intrasession repeatability was

Development of a questionnaire to assess the relative subjective benefits of presbyopia correction

Purpose To develop a standardized questionnaire of near visual function and satisfaction to complement visual function evaluations of presbyopic corrections. Setting Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Midland Eye Institute and Solihull Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Design Questionnaire development. Methods A preliminary 26-item questionnaire of previously used near visual function items was completed by patients with monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), multifocal IOLs, accommodating IOLs, multifocal contact lenses, or varifocal spectacles. Rasch analysis was used for item reduction, after which internal and test–retest reliabilities were determined. Construct validity was determined by correlating the resulting Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) scores with near visual acuity and critical print size (CPS), which was measured using the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test chart. Discrimination ability was assessed through receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results One hundred fifty patients completed the questionnaire. Item reduction resulted in a 10-item NAVQ with excellent separation (2.92), internal consistency (Cronbach a = 0.95), and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.72). Correlations of questionnaire scores with near visual acuity (r = 0.32) and CPS (r = 0.27) provided evidence of validity, and discrimination ability was excellent (area under ROC curve = 0.91). Conclusion Results show the NAVQ is a reliable, valid instrument that can be incorporated into the evaluation of presbyopic corrections.

Comparison of near visual acuity and reading metrics in presbyopia correction

PURPOSE: To provide a consistent standard for the evaluation of different types of presbyopic correction. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Presbyopic corrections examined were accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs), simultaneous multifocal and monovision contact lenses, and varifocal spectacles. Binocular near visual acuity measured with different optotypes (uppercase letters, lowercase letters, and words) and reading metrics assessed with the Minnesota Near Reading chart (reading acuity, critical print size [CPS], CPS reading speed) were intercorrelated (Pearson product moment correlations) and assessed for concordance (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) and agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) for indication of clinical usefulness. RESULTS: Nineteen accommodating IOL cases, 40 simultaneous contact lens cases, and 38 varifocal spectacle cases were evaluated. Other than CPS reading speed, all near visual acuity and reading metrics correlated well with each other (r>0.70, P<.001). Near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters was highly concordant (ICC, 0.78) and in close agreement with lowercase letters (+/- 0.17 logMAR). Near word acuity agreed well with reading acuity (+/- 0.16 logMAR), which in turn agreed well with near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters 0.16 logMAR). Concordance (ICC, 0.18 to 0.46) and agreement (+/- 0.24 to 0.30 logMAR) of CPS with the other near metrics was moderate. CONCLUSION: Measurement of near visual ability in presbyopia should be standardized to include assessment of near visual acuity with logMAR uppercase-letter optotypes, smallest logMAR print size that maintains maximum reading speed (CPS), and reading speed. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35:1401-1409 (C) 2009 ASCRS and ESCRS