How often are spectacle lenses not dispensed as prescribed?

Influence of prismatic effect due to decentration of optical center in ophthalmic lens

Background and Aims

Induced prismatic effects due to poor fitting spectacle frames is a common problem, seen in most of the spectacle wearers and this improper fitting is often due to optical center demarcation on lenses and this error causes asthenopic symptoms and diplopia. However, these errors are most common in developing countries due to lack of awareness, hence a standardized regulation is required. The current study aimed to estimate the amount of prismatic effect that is induced due to the decentration of an optical center in ophthalmic lens.

Methods

A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted in single vision spectacle wearers (N = 120) with a mean age of 25 ± 5 years. The pupillometric evaluation was performed to mark the pupil center on the spectacle lens. A lensometry evaluation was done to mark the optic center of the spectacle lens. A comparison was made to note whether the optic center is aligned with pupillary center. Objective assessment was performed through Prentice's rule (P = cF) and subjective symptoms were assessed through a validated visual comfort questionnaire.

Results

In this sample, around 57% of the individual with single vision glasses were not looking through the optic center and experiencing induced prismatic effect of -0.7 to 0.6 prism diopter, with mean decentration of 3.5 mm. Forty percent of the individuals with misaligned optic center showed asthenopic symptoms and visual discomfort.

Conclusion

Optometrist should check quality of dispensing and visual performance before handing over the newly dispensed glasses to the patients.

Spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice - a systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Spectacle non-tolerance or adverse events to spectacle wear are serious concerns for both patients and practitioners. Non-tolerance may contribute to a negative impact on the practitioner's ability and practice. Therefore, a detailed understanding of frequency and causes of spectacle non-tolerance in clinical ophthalmic practice is essential. This review aimed to determine the prevalence and causes of non-tolerance to spectacles prescribed and dispensed in clinical practice.

METHOD

The current systematic review included quantitative studies published in the English language that reported spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science database for studies published until 13 July 2020. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) modified for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of each included study. Five investigations with 205,478 study participants were included in the review. The prevalence of spectacle non-tolerance from individual studies was pooled using MetaXL software. The pooled prevalence of spectacle non-tolerance was 2.1% (95% CI: 1.6-2.7) ranging from 1.6% to 3.0%. The papers were also reviewed to identify the potential causes of non-tolerances. Nearly half reported that non-tolerance (47.4%) was due to an error in refraction. Other causes identified were errors related to communication (16.3%), dispensing (13.5%), non-adaptation (9.7%), data entry (8.7%), binocular vision (7.4%) and ocular pathology (6.4%).

SUMMARY

This review improves our understanding of spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice. This is important because non-tolerance may lead to spectacle wear discontinuation, which may deprive patients of optimal vision. Increased non-tolerance in clinical practice may affect a clinician's reputation and incur additional costs associated with reassessments and replacements. Spectacle non-tolerance occurred due to a multitude of factors related to optical dispensing and wearer adaptation. Therefore, there is a need for vigilance while prescribing spectacles. The limited evidence highlights the need for more studies, especially in limited-resource settings, to improve the quality of refractive error services.

Effects of simulated anisometropia and aniseikonia on stereopsis

PURPOSE

Stereopsis depends on horizontally disparate retinal images but otherwise concordance between eyes. Here we investigate the effect of spherical and meridional simulated anisometropia and aniseikonia on stereopsis thresholds. The aims were to determine effects of meridian, magnitude and the relative effects of the two conditions.

METHODS

Ten participants with normal binocular vision viewed McGill modified random dot stereograms through synchronised shutter glasses. Stereoacuities were determined using a four-alternative forced-choice procedure. To induce anisometropia, trial lenses of varying power and axes were placed in front of right eyes. Seventeen combinations were used: zero (no lens) and both positive and negative, 1 and 2 D powers, at 45, 90 and 180 axes; spherical lenses were also tested. To induce aniseikonia 17 magnification power and axis combinations were used. This included zero (no lens), and 3%, 6%, 9% and 12% at axes 45, 90 and 180; overall magnifications were also tested.

RESULTS

For induced anisometropia, stereopsis loss increased as cylindrical axis rotated from 180° to 90°, at which the loss was similar to that for spherical blur. For example, for 2 D meridional anisometropia threshold increased from 1.53 log sec arc (i.e. 34 sec arc) for x 180 to 1.89 log sec arc (78 sec arc) for x 90. Anisometropia induced with either positive or negative lenses had similar detrimental effects on stereopsis. Unlike anisometropia, the stereopsis loss with induced meridional aniseikonia was not affected by axis and was about 64% of that for overall aniseikonia of the same amount. Approximately, each 1 D of induced anisometropia had the same effect on threshold as did each 6% of induced aniseikonia.

CONCLUSION

The axes of meridional anisometropia but not aniseikonia affected stereopsis. This suggests differences in the way that monocular blur (anisometropia) and interocular shape differences (aniseikonia) are processed during the production of stereopsis.