Joseph F Pasternak

Wavefront-Guided Versus Wavefront-Optimized Photorefractive Keratectomy: Visual and Military Task Performance

PURPOSE To compare visual performance, marksmanship performance, and threshold target identification following wavefront-guided (WFG) versus wavefront-optimized (WFO) photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS In this prospective, randomized clinical trial, active duty U.S. military Soldiers, age 21 or over, electing to undergo PRK were randomized to undergo WFG (n = 27) or WFO (n = 27) PRK for myopia or myopic astigmatism. Binocular visual performance was assessed preoperatively and 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively: Super Vision Test high contrast, Super Vision Test contrast sensitivity (CS), and 25% contrast acuity with night vision goggle filter. CS function was generated testing at five spatial frequencies. Marksmanship performance in low light conditions was evaluated in a firing tunnel. Target detection and identification performance was tested for probability of identification of varying target sets and probability of detection of humans in cluttered environments. RESULTS Visual performance, CS function, marksmanship, and threshold target identification demonstrated no statistically significant differences over time between the two treatments. Exploratory regression analysis of firing range tasks at 6 months showed no significant differences or correlations between procedures. Regression analysis of vehicle and handheld probability of identification showed a significant association with pretreatment performance. CONCLUSIONS Both WFG and WFO PRK results translate to excellent and comparable visual and military performance.