Comparison of bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus lenses and a blend approach of extended depth of focus lenses and bifocal lenses in cataract patients

Table 4 Comparison of postoperative MTF and PSF in three groups

		Micro monovision group	Non-micro monovision group	Mixed group	P	Adjusted P (Micro monovision vs. Non-micro monovision)	Adjusted P (Micro monovision vs. Mixed)	Adjusted P (Mixed vs. Non-micro monovision on)
MTF Avg Height	dominant eye	0.49 ± 0.18	0.48 ± 0.12	0.53 ± 0.17	0.544 ^b
MTF Avg Height	non-dominant eye	0.50 ± 0.17	0.48 ± 0.14	0.36 ± 0.19	0.027 * ^b	0.968	0.039*	0.068
MTF10	dominant eye	0.56 ± 0.23	0.56 ± 0.17	0.62 ± 0.20	0.322 ^a
MTF10	non-dominant eye	0.56 ± 0.21	0.55 ± 0.19	0.38 ± 0.24	0.016 ^b*	0.990	0.027*	0.038*
MTF20	dominant eye	0.34 ± 0.22	0.29 ± 0.15	0.37 ± 0.18	0.389 ^b
MTF20	non-dominant eye	0.33 ± 0.20	0.31 ± 0.16	0.21 ± 0.28	0.057 ^a
MTF30	dominant eye	0.25 ± 0.18	0.20 ± 0.10	0.26 ± 0.15	0.478 ^b
MTF30	non-dominant eye	0.24 ± 0.17	0.22 ± 0.19	0.15 ± 0.14	0.056 ^a
PSF	dominant eye	0.373 ± 0.264	0.369 ± 0.258	0.425 ± 0.277	0.494 ^a
PSF	non-dominant eye	0.417 ± 0.282	0.408 ± 0.285	0.192 ± 0.269	0.009 ^a*	1.000	0.034*	0.003*

a: nonparametric test. Bonferroni’s multiple comparisons test was used to adjust the p value for between group comparisons. b: one-way ANOVA test. Turkey’s multiple comparisons test was used to adjust the p value for between group comparisons. *: P < 0.05

ISSN: 1471-2415