Limits...
Comparison of Objective and Subjective Changes Induced by Multiple-Pinhole Glasses and Single-Pinhole Glasses

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Multiple-pinhole (MPH) glasses are currently sold in many countries with unproven advertisements; however, their objective and subjective effects have not been investigated. Therefore, to investigate the effects of MPH glasses excluding the single-pinhole (SPH) effect, we compared the visual functional changes, reading speed, and ocular discomfort after reading caused by MPH and SPH glasses. Healthy 36 participants with a mean age of 33.1 years underwent examinations of pupil size, visual acuity (VA), depth of focus (DOF), and near point accommodation (NPA); tests for visual field (VF), contrast sensitivity (CS), stereopsis, and reading speed; and a survey of ocular discomfort after reading. Both types of pinhole glasses enlarged pupil diameter and improved VA, DOF, and NPA. However, CS, stereopsis, and VF parameters deteriorated. In comparison with SPH glasses, MPH glasses induced smaller pupil dilation (5.3 and 5.9 mm, P < 0.001) and showed better VF parameters with preserved peripheral VF. However, no significant difference was observed for VA, DOF, NPA, stereopsis, and CS. Reading speed using pinhole glasses was significantly slower than baseline; SPH glasses showed the slowest reading speed. Both types of glasses caused significant ocular discomfort after reading compared with baseline, and symptoms were worst with MPH glasses. In conclusion, both types of pinhole glasses had positive effects due to the pinhole effect; however, they had negative effects on VF, CS, stereopsis, reading speed, and ocular discomfort. In spite of the increased luminance and preserved peripheral VF with MPHs, these glasses caused more severe ocular discomfort than SPH glasses. This clinical trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02572544).

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Effects of SPH and MPH glasses. (A) On DOF. Mean DOF without any device (baseline) was 2.39 ± 1.27 D, and all participants showed increased DOF with either type of pinhole glasses compared with baseline. Differences in DOF were not significantly different between SPH and MPH glasses. (B) On accommodative amplitude. The difference in mean accommodative amplitude with or without SPH glasses was significant (12.06 ± 2.91 D with vs. 8.44 ± 1.77 D without). Differences between SPH and MPH glasses were not significant.SPH = single-pinhole, MPH = multiple-pinhole, DOF = depth of focus, D = diopter.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383620&req=5

Figure 3: Effects of SPH and MPH glasses. (A) On DOF. Mean DOF without any device (baseline) was 2.39 ± 1.27 D, and all participants showed increased DOF with either type of pinhole glasses compared with baseline. Differences in DOF were not significantly different between SPH and MPH glasses. (B) On accommodative amplitude. The difference in mean accommodative amplitude with or without SPH glasses was significant (12.06 ± 2.91 D with vs. 8.44 ± 1.77 D without). Differences between SPH and MPH glasses were not significant.SPH = single-pinhole, MPH = multiple-pinhole, DOF = depth of focus, D = diopter.

Mentions: Mean DOF was 2.39 ± 1.27 D at baseline, 3.09 ± 1.09 D with MPH glasses, and 3.27 ± 1.27 D with SPH glasses. All participants showed increased DOF with MPH and SPH glasses compared with baseline (P = 0.001 for MPH, P < 0.001 for SPH) No significant difference was seen for DOF between pinhole glasses types (P = 0.082) (Fig. 3A).


Comparison of Objective and Subjective Changes Induced by Multiple-Pinhole Glasses and Single-Pinhole Glasses
Effects of SPH and MPH glasses. (A) On DOF. Mean DOF without any device (baseline) was 2.39 ± 1.27 D, and all participants showed increased DOF with either type of pinhole glasses compared with baseline. Differences in DOF were not significantly different between SPH and MPH glasses. (B) On accommodative amplitude. The difference in mean accommodative amplitude with or without SPH glasses was significant (12.06 ± 2.91 D with vs. 8.44 ± 1.77 D without). Differences between SPH and MPH glasses were not significant.SPH = single-pinhole, MPH = multiple-pinhole, DOF = depth of focus, D = diopter.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383620&req=5

Figure 3: Effects of SPH and MPH glasses. (A) On DOF. Mean DOF without any device (baseline) was 2.39 ± 1.27 D, and all participants showed increased DOF with either type of pinhole glasses compared with baseline. Differences in DOF were not significantly different between SPH and MPH glasses. (B) On accommodative amplitude. The difference in mean accommodative amplitude with or without SPH glasses was significant (12.06 ± 2.91 D with vs. 8.44 ± 1.77 D without). Differences between SPH and MPH glasses were not significant.SPH = single-pinhole, MPH = multiple-pinhole, DOF = depth of focus, D = diopter.
Mentions: Mean DOF was 2.39 ± 1.27 D at baseline, 3.09 ± 1.09 D with MPH glasses, and 3.27 ± 1.27 D with SPH glasses. All participants showed increased DOF with MPH and SPH glasses compared with baseline (P = 0.001 for MPH, P < 0.001 for SPH) No significant difference was seen for DOF between pinhole glasses types (P = 0.082) (Fig. 3A).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Multiple-pinhole (MPH) glasses are currently sold in many countries with unproven advertisements; however, their objective and subjective effects have not been investigated. Therefore, to investigate the effects of MPH glasses excluding the single-pinhole (SPH) effect, we compared the visual functional changes, reading speed, and ocular discomfort after reading caused by MPH and SPH glasses. Healthy 36 participants with a mean age of 33.1 years underwent examinations of pupil size, visual acuity (VA), depth of focus (DOF), and near point accommodation (NPA); tests for visual field (VF), contrast sensitivity (CS), stereopsis, and reading speed; and a survey of ocular discomfort after reading. Both types of pinhole glasses enlarged pupil diameter and improved VA, DOF, and NPA. However, CS, stereopsis, and VF parameters deteriorated. In comparison with SPH glasses, MPH glasses induced smaller pupil dilation (5.3 and 5.9 mm, P &lt; 0.001) and showed better VF parameters with preserved peripheral VF. However, no significant difference was observed for VA, DOF, NPA, stereopsis, and CS. Reading speed using pinhole glasses was significantly slower than baseline; SPH glasses showed the slowest reading speed. Both types of glasses caused significant ocular discomfort after reading compared with baseline, and symptoms were worst with MPH glasses. In conclusion, both types of pinhole glasses had positive effects due to the pinhole effect; however, they had negative effects on VF, CS, stereopsis, reading speed, and ocular discomfort. In spite of the increased luminance and preserved peripheral VF with MPHs, these glasses caused more severe ocular discomfort than SPH glasses. This clinical trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02572544).

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus