‘Ease of adaptation’ predicts preferred spectacle prescriptions better than visual acuity: a retrospective analysis

Figures & data

Figure 1. The distribution of the difference in visual acuity, subjective quality of distance vision rating and subjective ease of adaptation rating between the two test prescriptions.

Figure 2. Percentage of participants who preferred the higher scoring (better subjective quality of distance vision or ease of adaptation rating or better logMAR VA) prescription.

Table 1. Wilcoxon signed rank test, scores between preferred and non-preferred prescriptions.

Dependent variable			Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test
	Preferred prescription, median (IQR)	Non-preferred prescription, median (IQR)	Z	P
Quality of distance vision rating (0–10)	9 (8–10)	8 (6–9)	−7.80	<0.0001
Ease of adaptation rating (0–10)	8 (7–10)	5 (3–8)	−8.32	<0.0001
Visual acuity (logMAR)	−0.09 (±0.08) *	−0.09 (±0.08) *	−0.60	0.55

IQR: inter-quartile range; *mean (standard deviation).

Table 2. Logistic regression model of the variables which best predicted whether the participant answered yes to the question ‘if you had purchased these spectacles for $100, would you be happy with them?’

	B (SE)	P value	95% CI for odds ratio
			Lower	Exp(B)	Upper
Constant	−5.823 (1.266)
Ease of adaptation rating	0.471 (0.102)	<0.0001	1.31	1.60	1.95
Quality of distance visionrating	0.483 (0.512)	0.0015	1.20	1.62	2.18
Binocular distance visual acuity (logMAR)	−2.129 (2.893)	0.46	0.00	0.12	34.52

SE: standard error; CI: confidence interval; logMAR: log of minimum angle of resolution.