Extended depth of focus contact lenses vs. two commercial multifocals: Part 2. Visual performance after 1 week of lens wear

Randomised clinical trial of extended depth of focus lenses for controlling myopia progression: Outcomes from SEED LVPEI Indian Myopia Study

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of extended depth of focus (EDOF) contact lenses for controlling myopia progression in children through a 1-year randomised clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 104 children aged 7-15 years, with spherical equivalent refraction ≤-0.50 D, were randomly assigned to wear SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses (n=48) or single vision spectacle lenses (n=56). Cycloplegic refraction with Shin-Nippon open field autorefractor and axial length with Lenstar LS 900 was determined at the baseline and 12-month visits. The compliance, visual discomfort and dryness questionnaires were administered during the final visit.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine children (control: n=38; treatment: 31) completed the 12-month follow-up visit, with no difference in baseline characteristics between the groups. Mean (SEM) myopia progression in the 12th month was -0.48±0.07D in the control group and -0.20±0.08D in the treatment group. Mean axial elongation was 0.22±0.03 mm and 0.11±0.03 mm in the control and treatment groups, respectively. SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses slowed myopia progression by 59% (-0.28D; p=0.01) based on spherical equivalent refraction and controlled axial length by 49% (0.11 mm; p=0.007) in comparison to single vision spectacle lenses. None of the participants reported any adverse effects. While most of the participants (82%) were comfortable with the contact lenses, 11% reported occasional dryness and 14% experienced mild fluctuations in visual acuity after immediate lens wear.

CONCLUSION

Daily wear of SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses in Indian children showed a significant effect in controlling myopia progression and axial elongation.

BCLA CLEAR Presbyopia: Management with contact lenses and spectacles

This paper seeks to outline the history, market situation, clinical management and product performance related to the correction of presbyopia with both contact lenses and spectacles. The history of the development of various optical forms of presbyopic correction are reviewed, and an overview is presented of the current market status of contact lenses and spectacles. Clinical considerations in the fitting and aftercare of presbyopic contact lens and spectacle lens wearers are presented, with general recommendations for best practice. Current options for contact lens correction of presbyopia include soft simultaneous, rigid translating and rigid simultaneous designs, in addition to monovision. Spectacle options include single vision lenses, bifocal lenses and a range of progressive addition lenses. The comparative performance of both contact lens and spectacle lens options is presented. With a significant proportion of the global population now being presbyopic, this overview is particularly timely and is designed to act as a guide for researchers, industry and eyecare practitioners alike.

BCLA CLEAR presbyopia: Mechanism and optics

With over a billion adults worldwide currently affected, presbyopia remains a ubiquitous, global problem. Despite over a century of study, the precise mechanism of ocular accommodation and presbyopia progression remains a topic of debate. Accordingly, this narrative review outlines the lenticular and extralenticular components of accommodation together with the impact of age on the accommodative apparatus, neural control of accommodation, models of accommodation, the impact of presbyopia on retinal image quality, and both historic and contemporary theories of presbyopia.

Two-Year Myopia Management Efficacy of Extended Depth of Focus Soft Contact Lenses (MYLO) in Caucasian Children

PURPOSE

To evaluate the progression of myopia as assessed by change in axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent (SE) from baseline in Caucasian children wearing extended depth of focus soft contact lenses (CLs) compared to distance single-vision spectacles.

DESIGN

Prospective non-randomized comparative clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 90 children (6-13 years of age) with SE ranging from -0.75 to -10.00 diopters (D) were recruited. Of these children, 45 were fitted with CLs (MYLO, mark´ennovy), whereas 45 children wore spectacles. Cycloplegic refraction was measured with an auto-refractometer (Topcon-TRK-2P) and AL with an IOLMaster-700 (Zeiss) at 6-month intervals. Subjective responses after 1 month of CL wear related to vision and comfort were determined using a questionnaire with a scale from 1 (very poor) to 10 (excellent). High-contrast visual acuity (HCVA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) were evaluated at baseline, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS

After 2 years, mean change in SE/AL in the CL group was -0.62 ± 0.30 D/0.37 ± 0.04 mm and -1.13 ± 0.20 D/0.66 ± 0.03 mm in the spectacles group (P < .001). Cumulative absolute reduction in axial elongation (CARE) was 0.29 ± 0.06 mm. Difference in SE change was -0.50 ± 0.34 D. Although 100% of CL group had an AL increase ≤0.50 mm, all participants increased ≥0.50 mm in the spectacles group. In all, 53% of the CL group and 1% in the spectacles group showed a progression in SE ≤ -0.50D. All questionnaire items showed a mean value ≥9. There was a reduction logMAR HCVA in the CL compared to the spectacles group but it was less than 1 line (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of MYLO CLs reduced axial elongation and myopia progression compared to use of distance single-vision spectacles.

Visual quality assessment and comparison of two multifocal scleral lens designs

PURPOSE

To analyze the visual quality of a new multifocal scleral lens with a customized decentred optic zone compared to a conventional design by measuring visual acuity, contrast sensitivity function, stereopsis, subjective vision and comfort after one month of wear.

METHODS

Nineteen presbyopic subjects were fitted with two multifocal scleral lens designs: a conventional multifocal and a customized decentred optical zone design. All subjects wore both scleral lens designs for one month with a two-week washout period. The main variables evaluated included high and low-contrast visual acuity under photopic and mesopic light conditions, binocular defocus curves, contrast sensitivity function and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for subjective vision and comfort.

RESULTS

Comparing the two scleral lens designs, statistically significant differences in visual acuity were found, highlighting the improvement in more than one chart line (6 letters) for low contrast near tests under photopic light conditions with the decentred optics lens design. VAS questionnaire scores also showed a significant improvement in distance and overall subjective vision with the decentred optics lenses. Contrast sensitivity function showed an improvement with decentred multifocal lenses at all spatial frequencies measured, being statistically significant for 12 cycles per degree. No differences in stereoacuity were found.

CONCLUSION

Multifocal scleral lenses with a customized decentred optical zone proved to be a promising refractive correction in presbyopic subjects after one month of wear, offering good comfort and visual quality under photopic and mesopic light conditions.

Visual Quality Assessment and Comparison of Monofocal and Multifocal Scleral Lens Designs: A Pilot Study

PURPOSE

To compare visual quality, contrast sensitivity, stereopsis, subjective vision, and comfort between monofocal and multifocal scleral lens (SL) designs.

METHODS

An experimental, cross over and short-term pilot study has been performed. Nineteen presbyopic patients (51.9±3.8 years) with regular corneas participated voluntarily in the study and Onefit MED monofocal and multifocal SL designs were fitted bilaterally. Subjective vision and comfort, contrast sensitivity function, stereopsis, high- and low-contrast visual acuity (VA) at 4 m and 40 cm under photopic and mesopic conditions, and defocus curves were measured. Data analysis was performed with nonparametric tests. P<0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Mean addition power of the prescribed lenses was 1.72±0.38 diopters. Multifocal design showed a statistically significant improvement for intermediate and near vision in the defocus curve under photopic and mesopic conditions (P<0.05), however, worsening in stereopsis (P<0.05) and contrast sensitivity for high spatial frequencies (P<0.05). Distance visual acuity (VA) showed significantly lower values under mesopic conditions for high- and low-contrast tests (P<0.05), and on low-contrast test under photopic conditions (P<0.001) with the multifocal design.

CONCLUSION

Multifocal SLs showed better visual performance at intermediate and near distances without compromising distance vision under photopic conditions for a high-contrast test when compared with monofocal design.

Presbyopia correction with multifocal contact lenses: Evaluation of silent reading performance using eye movements analysis

PURPOSE

Many activities of daily living rely on reading, thus is not surprising that complaints from presbyopes originate in reading difficulties rather in visual acuity. Here, the effectiveness of presbyopia correction with multifocal contact lenses (CLs) is evaluated using an eye-fixation based method of silent reading performance. ΜETHODS: Visual performance of thirty presbyopic volunteers (age: 50 ± 5 yrs) was assessed monocularly and binocularly following 15 days of wear of monthly disposable CLs (AIR OPTIX™ plus HydraGlyde™, Alcon Laboratories) with: (a) single vision (SV) lenses - uncorrected for near (b) aspheric multifocal (MF) CLs. LogMAR acuity was measured with ETDRS charts. Reading performance was evaluated using standard IReST paragraphs displayed on a screen (0.4 logMAR print size at 40 cm distance). Eye movements were monitored with an infrared eyetracker (Eye-Link II, SR Research Ltd). Data analysis included computation of reading speed, fixation duration, fixations per word and percentage of regressions.

RESULTS

Average reading speed was 250 ± 68 and 235 ± 70 wpm, binocularly and monocularly, with SV CLs, improving statistically significantly to 280 ± 67 (p = 0.002) and 260 ± 59 wpm (p = 0.01), respectively, with MF CLs. Moreover, fixation duration, fixations per word and ex-Gaussian parameter of fixation duration, μ, showed a statistically significant improvement when reading with MF CLs, with fixation duration exhibiting the stronger correlation (r = 0.79, p < 0.001) with improvement in reading speed. The correlation between improvement in VA and reading speed was moderate (r = 0.46, p = 0.016), as was the correlation between VA and any eye fixation parameter.

CONCLUSION

Average silent reading speed in a presbyopic population was found improved with MF compared to SV CL correction and was faster with binocular compared to monocular viewing: this was mainly due to the faster average fixation duration and the lower number of fixations. Evaluating reading performance using eye fixation analysis could offer a reliable outcome of functional vision in presbyopia correction.

Effect of Contact Lens Design on Objective Visual Acuity-Based Parameters in Pre-Presbyopic Patients in Photopic and Mesopic Lighting Conditions

Presbyopia is often corrected by progressive soft contact lenses (CL), and the resulting visual acuity-based parameters can be affected by the lens design and pupil size under different lighting conditions. In this study, we examined the effect of CL design (spheric vs. aspheric) on objective parameters of visual acuity-based parameters under mesopic vs. photopic lighting conditions. In a prospective, double-blind study, pre-presbyopic and presbyopic patients were fitted with spheric (Dispo Silk; 8.6 base curve, 14.2 diameter) and aspheric (Dispo Aspheric; 8.4 base curve, 14.4 diameter) CLs. The low contrast (10%) and high contrast (100%) visual acuity (VA), amplitude of accommodation (AA) (push-away method, Diopters) and distance contrast sensitivity (CS) (FACT chart, cycles per degree (CPD)) were measured with both types of CLs under mesopic and photopic lighting conditions. The eye with the better visual acuity was tested and analyzed. Thirteen patients (age range: 38-45 years) were included. The mean CS was significantly better with spheric compared to aspheric lenses for low spatial frequencies (3 CPD: 81.69 ± 7.86, 67.62 ± 5.67, respectively; p < 0.05), though there was no significant difference for lower or higher spatial frequencies (1.5, 6, 12, 18 CPD). The low-contrast (10%) and high-contrast (100%) VAs were not different between the two lens designs. However, there were significant differences between near VA, distance low-contrast VA and AA obtained under mesopic (dim) vs. photopic (bright) conditions with the aspheric design correction modality. In conclusion, photopic lighting conditions improved both the visual acuity and measured amplitude of accommodation with both lens designs, though the amplitude of accommodation was significantly higher with aspheric lenses. However, contrast sensitivity demonstrated the superiority of the spheric lens at a 3 CPD spatial frequency. This suggests that the ideal lens differs from patient to patient, depending on the visual demands.

Objective method for visual performance prediction

We propose, implement, and validate a new objective method for predicting the trends of visual acuity through-focus curves provided by specific optical elements. The proposed method utilized imaging of sinusoidal gratings provided by the optical elements and the definition of acuity. A custom-made monocular visual simulator equipped with active optics was used to implement the objective method and to validate it via subjective measurements. Visual acuity measurements were obtained monocularly from a set of six subjects with paralyzed accommodation for a naked eye and then that eye compensated by four multifocal optical elements. The objective methodology successfully predicts the trends of the visual acuity through-focus curve for all considered cases. The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.878 for all tested optical elements, which agrees with results obtained by similar works. The proposed method constitutes an easy and direct alternative technique for the objective testing of optical elements for ophthalmic and optometric applications, which can be implemented before invasive, demanding, or costly procedures on real subjects.

Visual Performance and Binocular/Accommodative Function of S.T.O.P. Contact Lenses Compared With MiSight

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the visual performance and binocular/accommodative function of two novel S.T.O.P. design (F2 and DT) contact lenses against MiSight when worn by myopic, young adults.

METHOD

This was a prospective, randomized, cross-over, single-masked study. Each lens was worn daily wear with overnight peroxide disinfection for approximately 7 days. Visual performance was assessed with subjective ratings (0-100): clarity of vision and lack of ghosting (far away, intermediate, and near), vision when driving, overall vision satisfaction, and with monocular high-contrast and low-contrast visual acuity (HCVA/LCVA) at 6 m, binocular HCVA (6 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, and 40 cm), binocular LCVA (6 m and 70 cm). Binocular function was assessed with heterophorias (3 m and 40 cm). Accommodative function was assessed with monocular accommodative facility (AF: 40 cm) and dynamic monocular accommodative response (AR: 6 m, 70 cm, and 40 cm).

RESULTS

F2 was rated higher than MiSight for clarity of vision (near and intermediate) and lack-of-ghosting ( P <0.001), while MiSight was rated higher than DT for clarity of vision (near, P <0.001). MiSight was better than F2 and DT for monocular HCVA (6 m) and binocular HCVA (6 m and 40 cm, P ≤0.02), but the maximum difference was ≤2 letters. There were no differences between designs for heterophoria ( P =0.61) nor were there any differences between DT and MiSight for any accommodative measure ( P >0.1). F2 was higher for monocular-AF ( P =0.007) and lower for AR (70 cm and 40 cm; P ≤0.007) compared with MiSight.

CONCLUSIONS

The visual performance and binocular/accommodative function of S.T.O.P. designs F2 and DT were comparable with MiSight. F2 outperformed MiSight in some aspects of subjective visual performance and monocular accommodative function.

New insights in presbyopia: impact of correction strategies

Presbyopia occurs when the physiologically normal age-related reduction in the eyes focusing range reaches a point, when optimally corrected for distance vision, that the clarity of vision at near is insufficient to satisfy an individual’s requirements. Hence, it is more about the impact it has on an individual’s visual ability to function in their environment to maintain their lifestyle than a measured loss of focusing ability. Presbyopia has a significant impact on an individual’s quality of life and emotional state. While a range of amelioration strategies exist, they are often difficult to access in the developing world and prescribing is generally not optimal even in developed countries. This review identified the need for a standardised definition of presbyopia to be adopted. An appropriate battery of tests should be applied in evaluating presbyopic management options and the results of clinical trials should be published (even if unsuccessful) to accelerate the provision of better outcomes for presbyopes.

Short-Term Effect of Wearing of Extended Depth-of-Focus Contact Lenses in Myopic Children: A Pilot Study

This pseudo-experimental, prospective, and longitudinal pilot study was conducted to characterize the optical and visual changes occurring in the short-term wear of a hydrophilic contact lens (CL) based on extended focus technology (EDOF). A total of 30 eyes of 15 children (age, 6–16 years) were fitted with the EDOF CL Mylo (Mark’ennovy Care SL), performing an exhaustive follow-up for one month evaluating changes in visual acuity (VA), accommodation, binocularity, ocular aberrometry, visual quality, pupillometry, keratometry and biometry. Far and near VA with the CL improved progressively (p < 0.001), obtaining mean final binocular values of −0.08 ± 0.01 and −0.07 ± 0.01 LogMAR, respectively. There was a mean reduction in the accommodative LAG of 0.30 D (p < 0.001), without associated alterations in the magnitude of the phoria and fusional vergences (p ≥ 0.066). A controlled but statistically significant increase (p ≤ 0.005) of ocular high order aberration (HOA) root mean square (RMS), primary coma RMS, primary spherical aberration Zernike term and secondary astigmatism RMS was found with the CL wear. In conclusion, the EDOF CL evaluated provides adequate visual acuity and quality, with associated increased of several HOAs and a trend to reduction in the accommodative LAG that should be confirmed in future studies.

Comparison of visual performance between extended depth of focus contact lens and single-vision contact lens in eyes with monofocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To assess the visual performance of extended depth of focus (EDF) contact lenses (CL) in eyes that had undergone monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation, and compare that between EDF and single-vision (SV) contact lenses.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, crossover study METHODS: Seventeen patients implanted with monofocal IOLs were enrolled. The study was conducted using 1dayPure EDOF as a test CL and 1dayPure moisture (both SEED Co., Ltd.) as a control CL. Binocular visual acuity from far to near distances, photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity (with and without glare), and stereopsis were evaluated after wearing the two kinds of CLs in random order. The obtained results were compared between the EDF and SV CLs.

RESULTS

Binocular visual acuity at 0.3, 0.4, 0.7, 1, and 5 m was 0.24 ± 0.12, 0.07 ± 0.09, - 0.02 ± 0.08, - 0.02 ± 0.08, and - 0.06 ± 0.07 logMAR during the EDF CL wear, respectively, and 0.39 ± 0.17, 0.26 ± 0.15, 0.04 ± 0.12, - 0.02 ± 0.08, and - 0.09 ± 0.09 during the SV CL wear, respectively. The EDF CL showed better results than the SV CL at 0.3, 0.4, and 0.7 m (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in contrast sensitivity between the EDF and SV CLs at 1.5 cycles per degree under all conditions; however, the sensitivity of the EDF CL was generally worse than that of the SV CL from the middle to high spatial frequencies. Stereopsis at 40 cm was significantly better in the EDF CL wear than in the SV CL wear (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The EDF CL substantially improved visual acuity at near to intermediate distances in IOL-implanted eyes. However, far visual acuity decreased under low-contrast conditions, and contrast sensitivity slightly declined at the middle to high spatial frequencies.

Clinical performance of presbyopia correction with a multifocal corneoscleral lens

AIM

To assess the clinical performance of a multifocal corneoscleral lens for the presbyopia correction.

METHODS

A prospective clinical trial of the Onefit™ A multifocal corneoscleral lens was conducted with 40 participants with presbyopia. At 4wk of continuous wear of the corneoscleral lens, changes in the distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity (VA) were evaluated. The safety of the corneoscleral lens, central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal endothelial cell count, binocular stereopsis, tear film break-up time (BUT), corneal staining, corneal edema, corneal neovascularization (NV), and conjunctival hyperemia were examined. In addition, a subjective questionnaire addressing satisfaction (rated from 1 to 5 points) and discomfort (rated from 1 to 5 points) was administered.

RESULTS

Forty participants were enrolled in this study. Six participants were excluded because of poor compliance with lens fitting (n=2) and loss to follow-up (n=4). The mean age of the participants was 53.0±4.9y. At 4wk of continuous wear of the corneoscleral lens, the best corrected far, intermediate, and near VA was 0.08±0.11, 0.10±0.12, and 0.10±0.12 logMAR, respectively. These results were significant improvements over the baseline uncorrected VA (far: P=0.004; intermediate: P=0.004; near: P=0.002). CCT, corneal endothelial cell count, binocular stereopsis, BUT, corneal staining, corneal edema, corneal NV, and conjunctival hyperemia were not significantly different between baseline and after corneoscleral lens use. The average satisfaction scores for fit sensation; corrected far, intermediate, and near VA; and ease of handling were 4.1, 3.4, 3.6, 3.5, and 3.4, respectively. The average discomfort scores for dryness, irritation, foreign body sensation, redness, fogging, and halo were 1.7, 1.8, 1.5, 1.7, 1.7, and 1.3, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Far, intermediate, and near VA are improved in presbyopic patients with the multifocal corneoscleral lens compared to uncorrected baseline VA, without adverse ocular effects. This evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of presbyopia correction with multifocal corneoscleral lenses.

Visual function, ocular surface integrity and symptomatology of a new extended depth-of-focus and a conventional multifocal contact lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual function, ocular surface integrity and dry eye symptoms with an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) design and a conventional multifocal (MF) contact lens (CL) after 15 days of wear.

METHODS

A crossover single mask randomised clinical trial was conducted including 30 presbyopes who used an EDOF and a conventional MF CL (Biofinity MF) for 15 days each. Defocus curves, depth-of-focus range, contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic and mesopic conditions (with and without glare) and subjective perception of halos and glare were evaluated. The ocular surface was evaluated through non-invasive Keratograph tear breakup time (NIKBUT), averaged tear breakup time (NIKBUT-avg), tear meniscus height (TMH), bulbar and limbal redness, and conjunctival and corneal staining. Dry eye symptoms were assessed with the OSDI questionnaire.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found for defocus curves or depth-of-focus between the two CLs (both p > 0.05). Subjective perception of halos and glare was not significantly different between CLs. Statistically significant differences were observed for CS under mesopic conditions for low spatial frequencies (p = 0.008). None of the CL produced significant changes in NIKBUT, NIKBUT-avg, TMH or redness. No change in conjunctival staining was observed in 76.7 % and 73.3 % of participants for EDOF and Biofinity MF, respectively. No change in corneal staining was observed in 86.7 % and 83.3 % of participants for EDOF and Biofinity MF, respectively. No changes were observed in the symptomatology measured with OSDI questionnaire (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both CL for presbyopia offer good visual quality, preserve the ocular surface integrity and provide the patient with similar symptomatology levels after 15 days of lens wear.

Bifocal and Multifocal Contact Lenses for Presbyopia and Myopia Control

Bifocal and multifocal optical devices are intended to get images into focus from objects placed at different distances from the observer. Spectacles, contact lenses, and intraocular lenses can meet the requirements to provide such a solution. Contact lenses provide unique characteristics as a platform for implementing bifocality and multifocality. Compared to spectacles, they are closer to the eye, providing a wider field of view, less distortion, and their use is more consistent as they are not so easily removed along the day. In addition, contact lenses are also minimally invasive, can be easily exchangeable, and, therefore, suitable for conditions in which surgical procedures are not indicated. Contact lenses can remain centered with the eye despite eye movements, providing the possibility for simultaneous imaging from different object distances. The main current indications for bifocal and multifocal contact lenses include presbyopia correction in adult population and myopia control in children. Considering the large numbers of potential candidates for optical correction of presbyopia and the demographic trends in myopia, the potential impact of contact lenses for presbyopia and myopia applications is undoubtedly tremendous. However, the ocular characteristics and expectations vary significantly between young and older candidates and impose different challenges in fitting bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for the correction of presbyopia and myopia control. This review presents the recent developments in material platforms, optical designs, simulated visual performance, and the clinical performance assessment of bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for presbyopia correction and/or myopia progression control.

Optimization of the Light Sword Lens for Presbyopia Correction

Purpose

We propose and evaluate the modifications of a light sword lens (LSL) to obtain better performance for distance vision while maintaining good operation for near and intermediate vision.

Methods

The modifications consisted of assigning angular or circular windows for distance vision while rescaling the LSL profile in the remaining area of the element. The objective performance of the redesigned LSLs was verified numerically by the Strehl ratio and experimentally using correlation coefficients and Michelson contrast. Subjective assessments were provided by monocular visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) through-focus curves for six patients with paralyzed accommodation. The tested object vergence range was [-4.0, 0.0] diopters (D). All experiments were conducted in a custom-made monocular visual simulator.

Results

Computational simulations and objective experiments confirmed the better performance of the modified LSL for the imaging of distant objects. The proposed angular and radial modulations resulted in flat VA and CS through-focus curves, indicating more uniform quality of vision with clearly improved distance vision. The VA provided by the modified LSL profiles showed a maximal improvement of 1.5 lines of acuity with respect to the VA provided by the conventional LSL at distance vision.

Conclusions

Optimized LSLs provide better imaging of distant objects while maintaining a large depth of focus. This results in comparable and acceptable quality for distance, intermediate, and near vision. Therefore, the modified LSLs appear to be promising presbyopia correctors.

Translational Relevance

The new design of LSL reveals an improved performance for all ranges of vision and becomes a promissory element for a real presbyopia correction in clinical applications.

Visual Performance of Daily-disposable Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses: A Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Trial

SIGNIFICANCE

The present study highlights the differences between modern daily-disposable multifocal soft contact lenses to assist eye care practitioners in fitting presbyopic contact lens wearers.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare visual performance of three daily-disposable multifocal contact lenses.

METHODS

Presbyopes (n = 72) wore 1-Day Acuvue Moist Multifocal, BioTrue ONEday for Presbyopia, and Dailies AquaComfort Plus Multifocal for 1 week in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover clinical trial. After 1 week, high- and low-contrast visual acuities (HCVA, LCVA) were measured between 6 m and 40 cm and stereopsis at 40 cm. Subjective performance was assessed with 1- to 10-point rating scales for clarity, ghosting, driving vision, vision stability, ease of focusing, overall vision satisfaction, and ocular comfort. Willingness to purchase was reported with categorical responses. Linear mixed models and χ tests were used for analysis, and level of significance was set at 5%.

RESULTS

BioTrue provided better HCVA and LCVA at distance than did Acuvue Moist (P ≤ .03). Subjectively, Acuvue Moist was rated lowest for distance clarity, distance ghosting, and driving vision (P ≤ .05). Acuvue Moist provided better HCVA at 70 to 40 cm and LCVA at 1 m to 40 cm than did BioTrue (P ≤ .01) and better LCVA at 1 m to 50 cm than did AquaComfort Plus (P ≤ .02). AquaComfort Plus also provided better HCVA and LCVA at 50 and 40 cm than did BioTrue (P ≤ .03). Acuvue Moist provided better stereopsis than did BioTrue (P = .02). Subjectively, BioTrue was rated lowest for near clarity (P ≤ .007) and lower than Acuvue Moist for intermediate clarity and near ghosting (P ≤ .04). No other differences were found between lenses (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

BioTrue had better distance performance compared with near, whereas Acuvue Moist performed conversely. AquaComfort Plus performed reasonably overall.

Vision Performance and Accommodative/Binocular Function in Children Wearing Prototype Extended Depth-of-Focus Contact Lenses

OBJECTIVE

To assess two prototype contact lenses (CLs) that extend depth of focus through deliberate manipulation of multiple spherical aberration terms (extended depth-of-focus [EDOF]) for visual performance, accommodative and binocular function, and objective static near refraction against a single-vision (SV) CL.

METHOD

This was a prospective, randomized, cross-over, single-masked (participant) clinical trial in which 16 myopic children wore 2 prototype CLs (EDOFL/EDOFH) designed for presbyopes and a SV CL, each for one week. Measurements comprised monocular and binocular high-contrast visual acuity (HCVA: 6 m, 40 cm), binocular low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA: 6 m), contrast sensitivity (CS: 6 m), phorias (3 m, 33 cm), monocular-accommodative facility (33 cm), and objective static refraction (spherical equivalent M) at zero, -3, and -5 D vergences. Measurements were taken 10 min after lens insertion. Subjective response was assessed using take-home questionnaires comprising vision clarity (distance/intermediate/near), vision quality (haloes at night/ghosting), vision stability when moving (playing sport/using stairs), and comfort.

RESULTS

Single vision was significantly better than both EDOF CLs for monocular HCVA, LCVA, and CS (6 m); vision clarity (distance), ghosting (P≤0.040), and EDOFL for binocular HCVA (6 m, P=0.047). M was significantly closer to the ideal objective static refraction at -3 and -5 D vergences (P≤0.004) with both EDOF compared with SV CLs. There were no differences between CLs for any other variable (P≥0.169).

CONCLUSION

Extended depth-of-focus CLs caused minimal disruption to the accommodative and binocular system compared with SV CLs when worn by myopic children. Future EDOF designs for children should reduce the difference between SV for distance vision and vision quality while maintaining the same performance for intermediate and near.

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Presbyopia is a global problem affecting over a billion people worldwide. The prevalence of unmanaged presbyopia is as high as 50% of those over 50 years of age in developing world populations, due to a lack of awareness and accessibility to affordable treatment, and is even as high as 34% in developed countries. Definitions of presbyopia are inconsistent and varied, so we propose a redefinition that states "presbyopia occurs when the physiologically normal age-related reduction in the eye's focusing range reaches a point, when optimally corrected for distance vision, that the clarity of vision at near is insufficient to satisfy an individual's requirements". Strategies for correcting presbyopia include separate optical devices located in front of the visual system (reading glasses) or a change in the direction of gaze to view through optical zones of different optical powers (bifocal, trifocal or progressive addition spectacle lenses), monovision (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses, laser refractive surgery and corneal collagen shrinkage), simultaneous images (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses and corneal inlays), pinhole depth of focus expansion (with intraocular lenses, corneal inlays and pharmaceuticals), crystalline lens softening (with lasers or pharmaceuticals) or restored dynamics (with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses, scleral expansion techniques and ciliary muscle electrostimulation); these strategies may be applied differently to the two eyes to optimise the range of clear focus for an individual's task requirements and minimise adverse visual effects. However, none fully overcome presbyopia in all patients. While the restoration of natural accommodation or an equivalent remains elusive, guidance is given on presbyopic correction evaluation techniques.

Visual performance of myopia control soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopes

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance of soft contact lenses reported to reduce myopia progression.

METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial, 30 non-presbyopic myopes wore MiSight™, center-distance Proclear® Multifocal (+2.00 D add), and two prototype lenses for 1 week each. High- and low-contrast visual acuities at 6 m, and 70 and 40 cm; stereopsis at 40 cm; accommodative facility at 33 cm; and horizontal phoria at 3 m and 33 cm were measured after 1 week. Subjective performance was assessed on a numeric rating scale for vision clarity, lack of ghosting, vision stability, haloes, overall vision satisfaction, and ocular comfort. Frequency of eye-strain symptoms and willingness to purchase lenses were also reported with categorical responses. Participants reported wearing times (total and visually acceptable). Linear mixed models and chi-square tests were employed in analysis with level of significance set at 5%. Theoretical optical performance of all lenses was assessed with schematic myopic model eyes (-1.00, -3.00, and -6.00 D) by comparing the slope of the edge spread function (ESF), an indicator for optical performance/resolution and the blur patch size of the line spread function, an indicator for contrast, between the lenses.

RESULTS

Proclear Multifocal and MiSight provided the best distance acuities. However, the prototype lenses were rated significantly higher for many subjective variables, and there were no subjective variables where commercial lenses were rated significantly higher than the prototypes. Theoretical optical performance showed steeper slopes of the ESF and greater blur patch sizes of the LSP with commercial lenses, supporting the clinical findings of better visual acuities but reduced subjective performance. Participants wore prototypes longer and reported their vision acceptable for longer each day compared to MiSight. Both prototypes had the highest willingness-to-purchase rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The prototypes were better tolerated by myopes compared to the commercial soft contact lenses currently used for slowing myopia progression.