Military Firing Performance After Wavefront-Guided Versus Wavefront-Optimized LASIK

Friday, April 17, 2015
KIOSKS (San Diego Convention Center)
Denise S. Ryan, MS
Richard D. Stutzman, MD
Joseph Francis Pasternak, MD
Rose Kristine C. Sia, MD
Jennifer Butterfield Eaddy, OD
Kraig S. Bower, MD

Purpose
To compare military firing performance after WFG vs. WFO LASIK.

Methods
Twenty-seven myopic patients were randomized to undergo either WFG (CustomVue STAR S4 IR) or WFO (Wavelight Allegretto Wave EyeQ excimer laser systems) LASIK. Manifest refraction and uncorrected distance visual acuities (UDVA) were determined at preop and 1, 3 and 6 months (M) postop. Military firing performance was evaluated at preop, 6 weeks and 6M postop under three conditions: iron sight; night vision goggle (NVG); and forward-looking infrared (FLIR) thermal sight. Pre- and postop firing range scores were compared between treatment groups at each time point using the Wilcoxon rank sum test; a Bonferonni adjusted p-value of <0.017 was considered significant.

Results
Mean age was 28.9±7.3 years in the WFG group and 29.1±6.3 years in WFO. Preoperative manifest spherical equivalent was-4.29±1.43diopters (D) WFG and -3.81±1.41D WFO.   At 6M, 92.3% WFG vs. 100% WFO achieved UDVA of ≥20/20. Firing results were otherwise comparable under all three conditions at preop, 6 weeks and 6M. At 6M , participants showed no change or improvement in firing between groups using the iron sights 83.3% WFG and 80.0% WFO (P=0.99), NVG 91.7% WFG and 70.0% WFO (P=0.29), and FLIR 91.7% WFG and 100% WFO (P=0.99).

Conclusion
Military task performance following WFG and WFO LASIK are comparable. Both WFG and WFO LASIK decrease the dependence on glasses when performing military tasks.