Purpose: To measure and compare distance and near visual acuity in amblyopic patients.Methods: This study was evaluated 167 patients with amblyopia between ages of 6 and 55 years. In all subjects, a comprehensive ophthalmic examination including visual acuity, refraction, slit lamp biomicroscopy, and funduscopy was performed. Distance visual acuity (DVA) was measured by Snellen chart at 4 m and near visual acuity (NVA) was measured by Snellen chart at 40 cm, and then DVA and NVA were compered and analyzed.Results:In our subjects, the mean distance and near visual acuity was 0.39± 0.30 log MAR and 0.30± 0.32 log MAR respectively. The mean NVA was 0.12±0.12 log MAR better than DVA and difference between them was statistically significant (P<0.001). In 40% of patients, there were no difference between DVA and NVA, and in 60% of them, NVA was 0.1 or more log MAR better than DVA. The difference between DVA and NVA was not significantly related with age (p=0.225), spherical equivalent (P=.820) and strabismus (P=.336) and type of amblyopia (P=.405). Although all of these subjects had subnormal DVA, but 43 subjects (26%) had normal NVA. In mild and moderate amblyopic groups, difference between DVA and NVA was 0.14±0.10 log MAR and 0.15±0.14 log MAR respectively, but in severe amblyopic group it was 0.03±0.08 log MAR. The difference between DVA and NVA showed a significant relation with severity of amblyopia (P<0.001). The difference between DVA and NVA was 0.16±0.11 log MAR in patients with history of amblyopia therapy and 0.07.± 0.11 log MAR in patients without treatment. This difference was statistically significant (P<0.001).Conclusion: Our results showed that near visual acuity in amblyopia especially in mild to moderate types was significantly better than distance visual acuity. More than 50% of subjects with mild amblyopia had normal near visual acuity. The difference between DVA and NVA showed no relation with age, spherical equivalent, strabismus, and type of amblyopia. Also, difference between the DVA and NVA in patients with history of amblyopia therapy was better than of it in non-treated subjects.

Visual impairment due to refractive errors and color vision deficiency (CVD) can affect the visual abilities of workers in workplace. Identifying the prevalence of common visual problems helps us to prevent and treat occupational ocular problems.This study was conducted on 2600 males referring from companies for a routine medical exam to Occupational Medicine Center. In all subjects, visual acuity and refraction were measured. Assessment of color vision was performed by Ishihara color test. In present study, right eyes of subjects were selected to statistical analysis.The mean spherical equivalent was –0.19 ± 1.39 diopter with a range of –11.00 to +10.00 diopter. Whereas 71% of persons were emmetropic, 20% and 9% of them were myopic and hypermetropic, respectively. From a total subjects, 164 of them had CVD with prevalence of color blindness of 6.3%. In comparison with normal subjects, CVD had no significant effect on refractive findings of our subjects (P > .05).Our data present the prevalence of refractive errors and color blindness among Iranian industry-workers. Compared with other studies, our subjects have a lower prevalence of refractive errors, and similar rate of prevalence of color blindness.

No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the therapeutic effects of 670 nm irradiation in patients with diabetic macular edema. In several studies, positive effects of red/near-infrared irradiation showed in a range of ocular diseases such as macular degeneration, macular edema, and retinitis pigmentosa. This study was conducted on forty five eyes of 26 diabetic patients with macular edema between the ages of 51 and 80.Measurement of visual acuity and slit lamp examination, funduscopy, and optical coherence tomography were performed in all subjects. None of the patients had proliferative retinopathy. We used a portable LED device (Warp 10, Quantum Devices) for treatment. Patients held this device at a distance of 3 cm from their eyes for 240 seconds for three months. Full ophthalmic examinations were repeated 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment.After 3 months, the mean visual acuity improved from 0.44 ± 0.38 log MAR to 0.27 ± 0.24 log MAR and vision increased by 1.52 ± 1.16 lines post treatment (р<0.001). The mean central macula thickness decreased from 381.49 ± 144.40 μm to 359.72 ± 128.84 μm (р=0.050). In patients with mild and moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, the mean central retinal thickness decreased 52.06 ± 67.78 μm and 39.27 ± 44.69 μm, respectively, but patients with severe type showed an increase of 34.93 ± 65.65 μm in the mean central retinal thickness (р<0.001). Also, the severity of macular edema had no effect on final outcomes (р>0.05). Photobiomodulation can positively affect diabetic macular edema, especially in patients with mild to moderate diabetic retinopathy.