Commentary Open Access
Volume 7 | Issue 1 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.46439/ophthalmology.7.036
Comment on “Use of refractive aids among adults in a general population”
Ivan Nisted1,2*, Bodil Hammer Bech3, Toke Bek4
- 1Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark
- 2Danish College of Optometry and Vision Science, DK-8900 Randers S, Denmark
- 3Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
- 4Department of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark
Corresponding Author
Ivan Nisted, ivn@eaDania.dk
Received Date: February 24, 2025
Accepted Date: April 24, 2025
Nisted I, Bech BH, Bek T. Comment on “Use of refractive aids among adults in a general population”. Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2025;7(1):8-9.
Copyright: © 2025 Nisted I, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Recommended Articles
Presbyopia correcting IOLs and the ocular surface disease… The good, the bad and the ugly
The last two decades were especially fruitful for the refractive surgeons and for the industry who have been showing tremendous development in both understanding and meeting patients’ desire for spectacle independence. Ever since the first trials from Dr. Kenneth Hoffer with his early 1980’s effort in producing a multifocal IOL to the latest achievements from different companies in putting trifocals and EDOF optics to the market.
Artisan and artiflex phakic intraocular lenses for high ametropia: long-term results
Phakic intraocular lenses have been available as an option for the treatment of refractive errors in eyes whose corneal surgical procedures such as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or small incision lenticule extraction (Smile) are formally contraindicated or unacceptable [1-3].
Comment on “Use of refractive aids among adults in a general population”
This commentary is a further discussion of results from the FORSYN study recently published in Scientific Reports [1]. In the FORSYN study 10,350 people selected by Statistics Denmark to represent the adult Danish population with respect to age, sex, and socio-economical parameters were invited for a non-cycloplegic examination at the Department of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital.