Visual Performance and Patient-Reported Visual Function with Multifocal, Monofocal, and Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Optometry and Vision Science, Jerusalem Multidisciplinary College, 37 Hanevi’im St., Jerusalem 9101001, Israel
- 2Department of Ophthalmology, Hadassah-Medical Centre and the Faculty of Medicine, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 9112001, Israel
- 3Department of Ophthalmology, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot 7661041, Israel
- 4Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 9112102, Israel
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to compare visual performance and patient-reported visual function among the enhanced monofocal TECNIS Eyhance, conventional monofocal Sensar, and multifocal Synergy intraocular lenses (IOLs) (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA). Methods: This prospective comparative observational study included patients assessed after cataract surgery with Eyhance, Sensar, or Synergy implantation. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuity were measured at distance, intermediate, and near, and contrast sensitivity was assessed using the Pelli-Robson chart. Participants completed the validated Visual Function Index (VF-14) and three nonvalidated exploratory questions addressing unaided intermediate vision. Eye-level outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models accounting for fellow-eye correlation and adjusted for age and preoperative spherical equivalent. The VF-14 was analyzed once per participant. Results: Fifty-two participants were enrolled, of whom 51 contributed 84 eligible eyes to the analysis: 40 Eyhance, 26 Synergy, and 18 Sensar eyes. Among the 51 analyzed participants, 31 (60.8%) were women. Mean age of participants was 69.98 ± 7.90 years, with an age range of 48–85 years. Adjusted uncorrected distance visual acuity did not differ among the IOL groups (p = 0.994). Synergy provided better uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuity than Eyhance and Sensar (overall p < 0.001 for both), whereas Eyhance and Sensar did not differ. Corrected visual acuity did not differ significantly among the groups at any distance. Contrast sensitivity differed at distance (p = 0.007) and near (p = 0.011); Synergy had lower values than both monofocal-type IOLs, whereas Eyhance and Sensar were comparable. Adjusted VF-14 scores did not differ among the groups (p = 0.451). Exploratory intermediate-vision responses favored Synergy but demonstrated a pronounced ceiling effect. Conclusions: All three IOLs provided comparable uncorrected distance visual acuity. Synergy was associated with better unaided intermediate and near visual acuity but lower contrast sensitivity, whereas Eyhance showed no objective advantage over Sensar. Overall patient-reported visual function did not differ among the groups, and findings from the additional intermediate-vision questions were exploratory.
Related
- Three-Year Functional Vision, Longitudinal Refractive Outcomes, and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of the Extend Bessel-Optics Intraocular Lens: An Independent Real-World Ambispective Study
- Mobility‐Related Psychological Factors and Self‐Reported Versus Performance‐Based Physical Function in Older Nigerian Adults
- Visual, refractive and patient-reported outcomes after two trifocal intraocular lens designs: a 12-month comparative cohort study.
- Comparative effectiveness of exercise and self-management interventions delivered through different modes of digital support on pain and patient-reported physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Self-reported chewing or swallowing problems and episodic memory performance in older Americans: a longitudinal cohort study
BibTeX
@article{beneli2026visual,
title = {{Visual Performance and Patient-Reported Visual Function with Multifocal, Monofocal, and Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses}},
author = {Hadas Ben-Eli and Inbar Wunch and Riki Maroko and Tamar Winnett and Deborah Berrih-Elkouby and Arie L. Marcovich},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218651},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8651},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Visual Performance and Patient-Reported Visual Function with Multifocal, Monofocal, and Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses
AU - Hadas Ben-Eli
AU - Inbar Wunch
AU - Riki Maroko
AU - Tamar Winnett
AU - Deborah Berrih-Elkouby
AU - Arie L. Marcovich
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/06
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218651
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8651
AB - Objective: The aim of the study was to compare visual performance and patient-reported visual function among the enhanced monofocal TECNIS Eyhance, conventional monofocal Sensar, and multifocal Synergy intraocular lenses (IOLs) (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA). Methods: This prospective comparative observational study included patients assessed after cataract surgery with Eyhance, Sensar, or Synergy implantation. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuity were measured at distance, intermediate, and near, and contrast sensitivity was assessed using the Pelli-Robson chart. Participants completed the validated Visual Function Index (VF-14) and three nonvalidated exploratory questions addressing unaided intermediate vision. Eye-level outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models accounting for fellow-eye correlation and adjusted for age and preoperative spherical equivalent. The VF-14 was analyzed once per participant. Results: Fifty-two participants were enrolled, of whom 51 contributed 84 eligible eyes to the analysis: 40 Eyhance, 26 Synergy, and 18 Sensar eyes. Among the 51 analyzed participants, 31 (60.8%) were women. Mean age of participants was 69.98 ± 7.90 years, with an age range of 48–85 years. Adjusted uncorrected distance visual acuity did not differ among the IOL groups (p = 0.994). Synergy provided better uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuity than Eyhance and Sensar (overall p < 0.001 for both), whereas Eyhance and Sensar did not differ. Corrected visual acuity did not differ significantly among the groups at any distance. Contrast sensitivity differed at distance (p = 0.007) and near (p = 0.011); Synergy had lower values than both monofocal-type IOLs, whereas Eyhance and Sensar were comparable. Adjusted VF-14 scores did not differ among the groups (p = 0.451). Exploratory intermediate-vision responses favored Synergy but demonstrated a pronounced ceiling effect. Conclusions: All three IOLs provided comparable uncorrected distance visual acuity. Synergy was associated with better unaided intermediate and near visual acuity but lower contrast sensitivity, whereas Eyhance showed no objective advantage over Sensar. Overall patient-reported visual function did not differ among the groups, and findings from the additional intermediate-vision questions were exploratory.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -