Accommodative Behavior of Eyes Wearing Aspheric Single Vision Contact Lenses

'The role of accommodative function in myopic development: A review.'

Purpose: Involvement of the accommodative mechanism in myopia progression has been hypothesised and investigated over the past years, given the emerging myopia crisis across the globe. This review aimed at exploring the clinical role of accommodative function in myopia development.Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed from conception to May 2021.Results:The initial stimulus for accommodation is derived from near work, in an attempt of the eye to obtain a clear image. When there is a lag in the accommodative response, the resulting blurred retinal image is believed to precipitate axial elongation and lead to myopia development. The dynamic accommodative functions implicated in binocular vision evaluation include the accommodative accuracy, amplitude and facility. Association of these accommodative parameters to current treatment options for myopia control is of great clinical interest. Effective myopia treatments, including orthokeratology, multifocal lenses and atropine eyedrops appear to induce changes in the dynamic accommodative response.Conclusions: Current knowledge indicates an evident relationship between the accommodative mechanism and myopia development. Further investigation by future studies is warranted in order to explore the use of accommodative function as a promising myopia-monitoring tool.

Associations between Binocular Vision Disorders and Contact Lens Dissatisfaction

SIGNIFICANCE

These data demonstrate that binocular vision disorders (BVDs) contribute to contact lens (CL) dissatisfaction independently of CL discomfort (CLD) in myopic, pre-presbyopic, adult, single-vision CL wearers.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine whether BVDs contribute to CL dissatisfaction and whether this contribution is independent of CLD.

METHODS

Participants attended one clinical visit while wearing their habitual CLs. Symptoms from CLD and BVDs were measured with the Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire-8 (CLDEQ-8) and Convergence Insufficiency Syndrome Survey (CISS), respectively. A comprehensive binocular vision (BV) assessment was performed. The Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) was used to measure CL dissatisfaction from CLD and BVDs based on reported correlations between the CLDEQ-8 and the CISS with the OSDI. Participants were categorized according to their CL comfort status (CLD [≥12 on CLDEQ-8] or non-CLD [<12 on CLDEQ-8]) and BV status (BVD or non-BVD).

RESULTS

Seventy-six participants completed the trial, and 19 (25%) were diagnosed with BVD. Those diagnosed with BVD scored higher than did those diagnosed with non-BVD for the OSDI (25.1 ± 12.7 vs. 10.7 ± 7.3, P < .001) and CISS (18.7 ± 7.7 vs. 11.9 ± 5.9, P = .001), but not the CLDEQ-8 (P = .25). Those categorized as having CLD scored higher than did those categorized as having non-CLD for the OSDI (19.0 ± 12.3 vs. 9.3 ± 5.9, P = .003) and CISS (16.1 ± 6.8 vs. 11.0 ± 6.2, P = .001). There were no significant interactions between BV status and CL comfort status for any questionnaire (P > .08).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher scores for OSDI in those with CLD or BVD indicate that both conditions contribute to CL dissatisfaction. Higher scores for the CISS in those with CLD suggest a degree of overlap for some BVD symptoms. Nonsignificant differences between BVD and non-BVD for the CLDEQ-8 suggest that BVDs contribute to CL dissatisfaction independently of CLD.

A randomised clinical trial of multifocal contact lenses and contact lens discomfort

PURPOSE

To determine how multifocal contact lenses affect contact lens discomfort.

METHODS

This randomised, participant-masked, crossover clinical trial fitted 84 uncomfortable soft contact lens wearers (30-40 years old) with single vision and multifocal contact lenses. Contact lens discomfort was assessed using the Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire-8 (CLDEQ-8).

RESULTS

There was no difference between multifocal and single vision survey scores (p = 0.08). There was an interaction between lens type and age group (p = 0.05). CLDEQ-8 scores with the single vision lens were less symptomatic than multifocal scores in participants <35 years old (p = 0.01). Single vision and multifocal scores for the older age group were not different. Subjectively, those in the <35 year-old age group preferred the single vision lens for intermediate (p = 0.02), distance (p = 0.003), and overall vision (p = 0.002). In the ≥35 year-old age group, no lens was significantly preferred for vision.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in the younger age group had more favourable wearing experiences with the single vision lens compared to the multifocal lens. The older age group, however, had similar wearing experiences with both lens types. While younger contact lens wearers may prefer the wearing experience with single vision lenses, some uncomfortable contact lens wearers approaching 40 years old may benefit from wearing a multifocal contact lens sooner in life than is typically practised.

Accommodation and its role in myopia progression and control with soft contact lenses

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of contact lens optical design on accommodative behaviour of children and the correlation between myopia progression and the accommodative response of the eye while wearing a contact lens designed for myopia control.

METHODS

A post-hoc analysis was conducted on data from a previously published myopia control trial. A total of 109 subjects (aged 8 to 11 years, myopia: -0.75 to -4.00 D) wore either a Control (single-vision, n = 57) or a Test (with positive spherical aberration, +SA, n = 52) soft contact lens, binocularly for 1 year. Accommodative response was measured as the subject observed targets at -1.00 to -4.00 D vergence using the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 open-field autorefractor (www.grandseiko.com). Slope of accommodative response (SAR) as well as distance and near phoria and stimulus accommodative convergence/accommodation (AC/A) were compared between each group at baseline without study lenses and at 1-week and 1-year visits with study lenses. The SAR was also compared to changes in axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent cycloplegic auto refraction (SECAR).

RESULTS

At baseline, there was no significant difference in SAR between the two study groups (ΔSAR = -0.039, p = 0.84). At 1 week, mean SAR of the Test group was significantly less than for the Control group (ΔSAR = -0.203, p < 0.0001), an effect that persisted to 1 year (ΔSAR = -0.129, p < 0.0001). In the Test group, greater SAR was associated with less change in AL (regression coefficient: -0.59 mm, p < 0.0001) and SECAR (regression coefficient: 1.12 D, p = 0.006) at 1 year. In the Control group, associations between SAR and change in AL and SECAR were not statistically significant. Compared to the Control group, eyes of the Test group appeared to be more exophoric with study lenses, however, the difference between the two groups was only significant at 1 week for distance phoria and 1 year for near phoria.

CONCLUSION

The soft contact lens with +SA for controlling myopia progression resulted in an apparent decrease in mean accommodation. Within the Test group, reduced accommodative response correlated with greater myopia progression, suggesting some subjects in the Test group utilised the +SA for near viewing, inducing hyperopic defocus at the retina. Accordingly, the potential impact of a lens optics on accommodative function should be considered during design of myopia control lenses.

Correction of presbyopia: old problems with old (and new) solutions

We live in a three-dimensional world and the human eye can focus images from a wide range of distances by adjusting the power of the eye's lens (accommodation). Progressive senescent changes in the lens ultimately lead to a complete loss of this ability by about age 50, which then requires alternative strategies to generate high-quality retinal images for far and close viewing distances. This review paper highlights the biomimetic properties and underlying optical mechanisms of induced anisometropia, small apertures, dynamic lenses, and multi-optic lenses in ameliorating the visual consequences of presbyopia. Specifically, the advantages and consequences of non-liner neural summation leveraged in monovision treatments are reviewed. Additionally, the value of a small pupil is quantified, and the impact of pinhole pupil location and their effects on neural sensitivity are examined. Different strategies of generating multifocal optics are also examined, and specifically the interaction between ocular and contact or intraocular lens aberrations and their effect on resulting image quality are simulated. Interestingly, most of the novel strategies for aiding presbyopic and pseudophakic eyes (for example, monovision, multifocality, pinhole pupils) have emerged naturally via evolution in a range of species.