Quantification of ghosting produced with presbyopic contact lens correction

Visual performance of single-vision contact lenses utilizing opaque, nonrefractive features for potential myopia management

SIGNIFICANCE

Contact lenses (CLs) utilizing opaque, nonrefractive features may purposefully modulate retinal ganglion cell activity away from the baseline activity. This is a nonrefractive mechanism that may reduce myopia progression. However, the visual performance of CLs with opaque features is unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the visual performance and binocular/accommodative function of CLs with opaque features (test) against MiSight (control-1) and single-vision (control-2) CLs.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, unmasked, cross-over study where 35 myopic CL wearers (18 to 39 years) wore each design for at least 5 days. Visual performance was subjectively assessed using 1 to 10 numeric ratings comprising clarity of vision, lack of ghosting, vision when driving, overall vision satisfaction, and willingness to purchase (yes/no: based on vision and myopia efficacy). Visual acuity measurements comprised monocular and binocular high and low contrast visual acuity at 6 m, and binocular high contrast visual acuity at 70 and 40 cm. Binocular function was assessed using heterophorias at 3 m and 40 cm. Accommodative function was assessed using monocular accommodative facility (MAF) at 40 cm and dynamic monocular accommodative response (AR: 6 m, 70 cm, and 40 cm).

RESULTS

Test was rated higher than control-1 (p<0.001) and control-2 was rated higher than test (p≤0.0052) for all subjective ratings. More participants were willing to purchase test compared with control-1 for vision and myopia efficacy (p<0.001), while there was no difference between test and control-2 for either question (p>0.7). Both controls were better than test for all acuity-based measurements (p≤0.0013). MAF at 40 cm was better with test compared with control-1 (p=0.010) and not different to control-2 (p>0.99). AR was higher with test than both controls at 70 cm (p<0.0001), higher than control-1 at 40 cm (p<0.0001), and not different to control-2 at 40 cm (p=0.12). There were no differences between CLs for AR at 6 m or heterophorias at 3 m or 40 cm (p>0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with control-1, the test offered better visual performance, a higher proportion of participants willing to purchase, and better MAF. Compared with control-2, the test offered worse visual performance, but the proportion of participants willing to purchase was not different, and accommodative function was comparable.

Effects of Target Clarity on Monocular Blur Suppression: A Video Simulation of Simultaneous Vision Multifocal Lens Correction

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of target clarity on monocular blur suppression while using simultaneous vision multifocal lenses through video simulation.

METHODS

Twenty healthy adults (mean age 20.8±6.1 years) were presented with circular targets at three spatial frequencies (3, 6, and 18 cpd). Gaussian blur filter simulated full refractive correction (0 pixels of blur) and two levels of residual refractive error correction (10 pixels and 20 pixels, respectively). For each target condition, a 50% transparent image with the same spatial frequency was superimposed, with its blur gradually increasing by 0.1 pixels every 0.2 s. The time until participants detected additional blur compared to the initial state was measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

Participants perceived blur significantly earlier in the two levels of residual refractive error models (10 and 20 pixels of initial blur) compared to the full refractive correction model across all spatial frequencies (p < 0.017). Spatial frequency also influenced blur perception, with detection occurring significantly earlier at higher cpd values across initial blur conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Residual refractive error appears to impair the function of monocular blur suppression, aggravating the perception of ghost images. Full refractive correction is therefore essential for effectively suppressing these unwanted visual artifacts.

Visual performance and quality of life in myopic adolescents with pupil-optimised multifocal versus single-vision contact lenses

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Myopia control is a prominent area of global research, with multifocal contact lenses identified as an effective intervention for adolescents.

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the visual performance and vision-related quality of life (QoL) of myopic adolescents when corrected with pupil-optimised multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCLs) versus single-vision contact lenses (SVCLs), with each participant serving as their own control.

METHODS

Thirty-five myopic adolescents, habitually wearing SVCLs and fitted with pupil-optimised MFSCL with mid-addition power, were recruited. The assessment included distance visual acuity (DVA), near visual acuity (NVA), maximum reading speed (MRS), reading acuity (RA), contrast sensitivity (CS), and stereoacuity (SA) in photopic conditions for both types of lenses. Vision-related QoL was quantified twice for both lens types using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-42), covering 13 vision-specific domains.

RESULTS

Comparisons of visual outcomes between MFSCLs and SVCLs for the same subjects revealed statistically significant differences in DVA (p = 0.010), NVA (p = 0.014), MRS (p = 0.044), and RA (p < 0.001), with SVCLs outperforming in DVA only. No significant difference in CS and SA was observed between the two lens types. According to the NEI VFQ-42, scores for clarity of vision, far vision, glare, and satisfaction with correction were higher with SVCLs, while the score for near vision was higher with MFSCLs. When fitted with MFSCLs, no significant correlations were found between pupil size and age of the patient with any visual examination parameters. However, there was a significant negative correlation between the DVA, NVA and the spherical equivalent of the lens.

CONCLUSION

MFSCLs with mid-add power significantly improve NVA, MRS, and RA, albeit with a reduction in DVA compared to SVCLs. While SVCLs were associated with better clarity of vision, far vision, and satisfaction with correction, MFSCLs offered superior performance in near vision tasks, according to the NEI VFQ-42 scores.

Evaluation of the Functional Visual Range of a Catenary Curve-Based, Extended Depth-of-Focus Contact Lens for Presbyopia

Purpose

Employing "relative plus" (Add) power to extend the functional vision range is a primary method to correct presbyopia with contact lenses. Simultaneous vision contact lenses are typically associated with visual disturbances at higher Add powers, often resulting in compromised vision and necessitating specialized fitting methods. Among mature individuals suffering from presbyopia, we evaluated the visual performance of a catenary curve-based extended depth of focus (EDOF) optical profile contact lens with a simplified fitting process.

Methods

Mature individuals suffering from presbyopia with Add requirements of +2.00 D or more were recruited. Monocular and binocular visual acuities were obtained across optical vergences ranging from -4.00 D to +2.00 D to generate defocus curves for best spectacle-corrected distance vision (baseline) and center-distance, catenary curve-based contact lenses (catenary). A subjective questionnaire evaluating the lenses was employed.

Results

Twenty-four mature individuals suffering from presbyopia, average age 59.2 (range: 51-68 years) and average Add requirement of +2.24 D (range +2.00 D to +2.50 D) were enrolled. Under high-contrast conditions, the catenary lens provided functional binocular vision (0.30 logMAR or better) at all optical vergences from distance to -3.50 D (equivalent to 28 cm). Participants demonstrated a significant improvement (p < 0.05) in binocular visual acuity while wearing the catenary lens with an imposed defocus of -1.50 D to -4.00 D (equivalent to object distances from 66 cm to 25 cm). Subjective ratings with the catenary lens were equivalent to those documented at baseline.

Conclusion

The catenary curve-based lenses provided a full range of functional vision while maintaining clear distance vision for individuals suffering from advanced presbyopia. Comparison with previous results involving this lens indicates that these findings are also generalizable to wearers with lower Add requirements. This EDOF design provides a universal Add which is sufficient for advanced presbyopia.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT05495971.

Intraocular Straylight and Multifocal Soft Contact Lens Fit With a Myopia Control Approach

OBJECTIVES

Center-distance multifocal contact lenses (MFCLs) are used to slow myopia progression. We examined the effect of two MFCLs on intraocular straylight values in myopic individuals.

METHODS

Twenty-five young myopic adults were enrolled and were fit with three contact lenses (Biofinity sphere, Biofinity Multifocal, and NaturalVue Multifocal) in a random order over two study visits. Pupil size (NeurOptics VIP-300, Laguna Hills, CA) and contact lens centration were measured. Right eye intraocular straylight measurements were collected (OCULUS C-Quant; Wetzlar, Germany) and compared with a spectacle trial lens. Log straylight (LogSL) values and straylight residuals were analyzed using repeated-measures analyses of variance with Tukey-corrected post hoc t -tests.

RESULTS

The mean participant age (±SD) was 24.1±1.5 years, and right eye spherical equivalent refractive error was -3.38±1.53 DS. There was no difference in mesopic pupil size between visits ( P =0.68) and no difference in contact lens centration between lenses ( P =0.99). LogSL values differed by lens type ( P =0.004). LogSL with the spectacle trial lens was significantly greater than with each contact lens type (all P <0.05), but there were no significant differences in LogSL between the three contact lenses (all P >0.05). There was no difference between the three contact lens designs for straylight residuals ( P =0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Measured intraocular straylight for both MFCLs was not different than with a spherical soft contact lens. A significant increase in intraocular straylight with spectacle trial lens correction was observed compared with all contact lenses.

Multifocal versus modified monovision corrections: A non-dispensing comparison of visual assessment in presbyopic neophytes

Purpose

To compare the visual performance of two simultaneous-vision soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal contact lens and its modified monovision counterpart in presbyopic neophytes.

Methods

A double-masked, prospective, comparative study was conducted on 19 participants fitted with soft PureVision2 multifocal (PVMF) and clariti multifocal (CMF) lenses in random order. High- and low-contrast distance visual acuity, near visual acuity, stereopsis, contrast sensitivity, and glare acuity were measured. The measurements were conducted using multifocal and modified monovision design with one brand and then repeated with another brand of lens.

Results

High-contrast distance visual acuity showed a significant difference between CMF (0.00 [-0.10-0.04]) and PureVision2 modified monovision (PVMMV; -0.10 [-0.14-0.00]) correction (P = 0.003) and also between CMF and clariti modified monovision (CMMV; -0.10 [-0.20-0.00]) correction (P = 0.002). Both modified monovision lenses outperformed CMF. The current study did not show any statistically significant difference between contact lens corrections for low-contrast visual acuity, near visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity (P > 0.01). Stereopsis at near distance was significantly lower with both modified monovision (PVMMV: 70 [50-85]; P = 0.007, CMMV: 70 [70-100]; P = 0.006) and with CMF (50 [40-70]; P = 0.005) when compared to spectacles (50 [30-70]). Glare acuity was significantly lower with multifocal (PVMF: 0.46 [0.40-0.50]; P = 0.001, CMF: 0.40 [0.40-0.46]; P = 0.007) compared with spectacles (0.40 [0.30-0.40]), but no significant difference was noted between the multifocal contact lenses (P = 0.033).

Conclusion

Modified monovision provided superior high-contrast vision compared to multifocal correction. Multifocal corrections performed better for stereopsis when compared to modified monovision. In parameters like low-contrast visual acuity, near acuity, and contrast sensitivity, both the corrections performed similarly. Both multifocal designs showed comparable visual performances.

The effect of concentric and aspheric multifocal soft contact lenses on binocular vision in young adult myopes

PURPOSE

Multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCLs) are prescribed to inhibit myopia progression; these include aspheric and concentric designs. The effects of MFCLs on visual quality, accommodation and vergence in young-adult myopes were evaluated.

METHODS

Participants were twenty-six myopes (19-25 years, spherical equivalent -0.50 to -5.75D), with normal binocular vision and no past myopia control. Pupil sizes were 4.4 ± 0.9 mm during distance viewing and 3.7 ± 0.8 mm at near. In random order, participants wore four MFCLs: Proclear single vision distance, MiSight concentric dual focus (+2.00D), distance center aspheric (Biofinity, +2.50D) (CooperVision lenses), and NaturalVue aspheric (Visioneering Technologies). Testing included visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (Pelli-Robson), stereoacuity, accommodation response, negative and positive relative accommodation, horizontal phorias, horizontal fusional vergence and AC/A ratio, and a visual quality questionnaire.

RESULTS

The four lenses differed in distance (p = 0.001) and near visual acuity (p = 0.011), and contrast sensitivity (p = 0.001). Compared with the single vision lens, the Biofinity aspheric had the greatest visual impact: 0.19 ± 0.14 logMAR distance acuity reduction, 0.22 ± 0.15 log contrast sensitivity reduction. Near acuity was affected less than distance acuity; the reduction was greatest with the NaturalVue (0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR reduction). The MFCLs altered the autorefraction measure at distance and near (p = 0.001); the accommodation response was less with aspheric lenses. Negative relative accommodation reduced with the aspheric lenses (p = 0.001): by 0.9 ± 0.5D with Biofinity and 0.5 ± 0.7D with NaturalVue. Exophoric shifts were greater with aspheric lenses (1.8 ± 2.4Δ Biofinity, 1.7 ± 1.7Δ NaturalVue) than with the concentric MiSight (0.5 ± 1.3Δ).

CONCLUSIONS

MFCLs alter visual performance, refraction and vergence; two aspheric lenses had greater effect than a concentric lens.

Centration assessment of an extended depth of focus contact lens for myopic progression control

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy and the inter and intra-observer reliability of the centration assessment of extended depth of focus (EDOF) contact lenses (CL) using corneal topography.

METHOD

EDOF soft CLs (Mylo, Mark'Ennovy) were fitted on thirty-three myopic students (25 females), aged 19-28 years (22.7 ± 2.0 years). For any EDOF CL, a topography over the CL and a slit lamp (SL) digital picture were taken in random order. For the topographic images, the position of the EDOF CL centre, with respect to the pupil centre, was detected by two different practitioners (one newly graduated and one with more than 20 years of clinical experience respectively) and repeated after 15 days. This measurement was compared to the one taken through the SL, considered as the gold standard, and assessed using the instrument software.

RESULTS

EDOF CLs resulted decentred inferiorly and temporally ranging, in the case of slit lamp assessment, between -0.27 ± 0.19 and 0.22 ± 0.23 mm horizontally and between -0.12 ± 0.31 and -0.17 ± 0.34 mm vertically, for the right and left eye respectively. The accuracy of the topographic assessment in determining EDOF CL centration was found to be very good compared to the SL assessment. No differences were found for the left eye, whereas in the right eye, a less temporally decentred position of the CL was detected by the topographical method (p < 0.05). However, this difference appeared clinically negligible (0.14 ± 0.22 mm). Inter-observer reliability (the differences between the two practitioners in assessing the EDOF centre) resulted significant only for the vertical coordinates of the centre position (p < 0.05). Concerning intra-observer reliability, better coefficient of precision and reliability between measurements within the same session were achieved by the more experienced practitioner, as well as a better level of the intraclass correlation coefficient in test-retest.

CONCLUSION

The centration of the EDOF CL investigated in this study can be accurately detected by a corneal topography performed over CLs. Inter-observer reliability resulted good whereas the intra-observer reliability resulted partially affected by the level of clinical experience of the practitioner.

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.

Visual performance with multifocal corneal gas-permeable contact lenses in young adults: A pilot study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the performance of four experimental multifocal gas permeable contact lens (MFGPCL) designs and their impact on visual function in young adults.

METHODS

Seventeen young adults (age, 23.17 ± 4.48 years) enrolled in the study. Each participant was randomly assigned to wear two of four MFGPCL designs. They wore the first type of the assigned lens binocularly for one week and, after one week of washout period, wore another design on both eyes for another week. The four MFGPCL designs were as follows: design A (distance zone [DZ] 1.5 mm / add 3.0 D), B (DZ 1.5 mm / add 1.5 D), C (DZ 3.0 mm / add 3.0 D), and D (DZ 3.0 mm / add 1.5 D). Baseline visual acuity, contrast sensitivity function, and accommodation data were collected at baseline and repeated after one week of MFGPCL daily wear.

RESULTS

Distance and near visual acuities were not significant affected with the four MFGPCL designs. Contrast sensitivity was significantly lower in design A across all measured spatial frequencies (p < 0.05), with no significant impact from other designs on all frequencies. No significant effect was observed on accommodation measured at 33 cm (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Three of the investigated MFGPCL designs preserve satisfactory visual performance. Lens design A incorporated with higher add and smaller center zone diameter had a stronger impact on the visual performance.

Catastrophe optics theory unveils the localised wave aberration features that generate ghost images

Monocular polyplopia (ghost or multiple images) is a serious visual impediment for some people who report seeing two (diplopia), three (triplopia) or even more images. Polyplopia is expected to appear if the point spread function (PSF) has multiple intensity cores (a dense concentration of a large portion of the radiant flux contained in the PSF) relatively separated from each other, each of which contributes to a distinct image. We present a theory that assigns these multiple PSF cores to specific features of aberrated wavefronts, thereby accounting optically for the perceptual phenomenon of monocular polyplopia. The theory provides two major conclusions. First, the most likely event giving rise to multiple PSF cores is the presence of hyperbolic, or less probably elliptical, umbilic caustics (using the terminology of catastrophe optics). Second, those umbilic caustics formed on the retinal surface are associated with certain points of the wave aberration function, called cusps of Gauss, where the gradient of a curvature function vanishes. However, not all cusps of Gauss generate those umbilic caustics. We also provide necessary conditions for those cusps of Gauss to be fertile. To show the potential of this theoretical framework for understanding the nature and origin of polyplopia, we provide specific examples of ocular wave aberration functions that induce diplopia and triplopia. The polyplopia effects in these examples are illustrated by depicting the multi-core PSFs and the convolved retinal images for clinical letter charts, both through computer simulations and through experimental recording using an adaptive optics set-up. The number and location of cores in the PSF is thus a potentially useful metric for the existence and severity of polyplopia in spatial vision. These examples also help explain why physiological pupil constriction might reduce the incidence of ghosting and multiple images of daily objects that affect vision with dilated pupils. This mechanistic explanation suggests a possible role for optical phase-masking as a clinical treatment for polyplopia and ghosting.

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.

Assessment of the image quality of extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens models in polychromatic light

PURPOSE

The use of monochromatic light in the assessment of intraocular lenses (IOLs) has been criticized for not representing the real-world situation. This study aimed to measure and compare the image quality of 3 extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOL models in monochromatic and polychromatic light.

SETTING

David J Apple Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.

DESIGN

In vitro study.

METHODS

An optical metrology instrument was used to study image quality metrics of diffractive IOLs with chromatic aberration correction (Symfony and AT Lara) and a refractive lens (Mini Well). The modulation transfer function (MTF) was measured in green and polychromatic light at a 2.0 mm, 3.0 mm, and 4.0 mm aperture. The EDOF IOL's tolerance to defocus was tested against a monofocal lens.

RESULTS

The mean MTF of the EDOF IOL at far distance was decreased in polychromatic compared with monochromatic light. The largest effect was found in the refractive lens; however, at intermediate distance, only small differences occurred. In their tolerance to defocus, the EDOF IOLs were superior to the monofocal IOL. The diffractive IOL had higher MTFs than that of the refractive IOL at 2 primary foci, the refractive IOL's optical quality varied less with defocus at 3.0 mm. The refractive lens was the most susceptible to changes in aperture size.

CONCLUSION

The diffractive EDOF IOL was more resistant to chromatic effects than the refractive IOL. The EDOF IOLs provided an extended through-focus performance compared with the monofocal IOL, but differences in optical design, particularly pupil dependency, should be considered when refining IOL selection for patients.

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.

Visual performance after bilateral toric extended depth-of-focus IOL exchange targeted for micromonovision

PURPOSE

To evaluate overall patient satisfaction, spectacle independence, binocular visual acuity, rotational stability, prevalence of optical phenomena, and decentration and tilt after bilateral toric extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens (EDOF IOL) implantation targeted for micromonovision.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

The study included 52 eyes of 26 patients with regular corneal astigmatism from 0.75 to 2.60 diopters (D) that were implanted bilaterally with a toric EDOF IOL targeted for micromonovision. Postoperative visual acuity, astigmatism reduction, rotation, tilt, decentration, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, and photic phenomena were assessed.

RESULTS

For the 52 eyes studied, binocular means expressed in logarithm of the minimum angle resolution for postoperative corrected distance, uncorrected distance, uncorrected intermediate, and uncorrected near visual acuities were -0.10 (±0.12), -0.01 (±0.13), 0.01 (±0.14), and 0.13 (±0.14), respectively. Mean refractive astigmatism reduction was 1.31 ± 0.67 D resulting in a mean refractive cylinder of 0.47 ± 0.46 D at the 3-month visit. Mean postoperative rotation was 3.5 ± 3.5 degrees, at the 3-month time point. Most prevalent dysphotopsia were halos, starburst, and glare affecting 6 (23%), 6 (23%), and 5 (19%) of 26 patients, respectively; 20 (77%) of 26 patients reported spectacle independence, with 19 (95%), 19 (95%), and 14 (70%) of 20 patients questioned being satisfied with distance, intermediate, and near vision, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Toric EDOF IOL implantation targeted for micromonovision resulted in reliable reduction of preoperative astigmatism with a high degree of postoperative rotational predictability and centration, enabling functional distance, intermediate, and near vision, which manifested itself in high patient satisfaction.

Visual quality of juvenile myopes wearing multifocal soft contact lenses

Background

It is unclear whether multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCLs) affect visual quality when they are used for myopia control in juvenile myopes. The aim of this study was, therefore, to investigate the effect of MFSCLs on visual quality among juvenile myopia subjects.

Methods

In a prospective, intervention study, thirty-three juvenile myopes were enrolled. Visual perception was assessed by a quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire with spectacles at baseline and after 1 month of MFSCL wear. At the one-month visit, the high (96%) contrast distance visual acuity (distance HCVA) and low (10%) contrast distance visual acuity (distance LCVA) were measured with single vision spectacle lenses, single vision soft contact lenses (SVSCLs) and MFSCLs in a random order. Wavefront aberrations were measured with SVSCLs, with MFSCLs, and without any correction.

Results

Neither distance HCVA (p > 0.05) nor distance LCVA (p > 0.05) revealed any significant difference between MFSCLs, SVSCLs and single vision spectacle lenses. The overall score (the sum of ten symptoms) of the QoV questionnaire did not show a statistically significant difference between spectacles at baseline and after 1 month of MFSCL wear (p = 0.357). The results showed that the frequency (p < 0.001), severity (p = 0.001) and bothersome degree (p = 0.016) of halos were significantly worse when wearing MFSCLs than when wearing single vision spectacle lenses. In contrast, the bothersome degree caused by focusing difficulty (p = 0.046) and the frequency of difficulty in judging distance or depth perception (p = 0.046) were better when wearing MFSCLs than when wearing single vision spectacle lenses. Compared with the naked eye, MFSCLs increased the total aberrations (p < 0.001), higher-order aberrations (p < 0.001), trefoil (p = 0.023), coma aberrations (p < 0.001) and spherical aberrations (SA) (p < 0.001). Compared with the SVSCLs, MFSCLs increased the total aberrations (p < 0.001), higher-order aberrations (p < 0.001), coma aberrations (p < 0.001) and SA (p < 0.001). The direction of SA was more positive (p < 0.001) with the MFSCLs and more negative (p = 0.001) with the SVSCLs compared with the naked eye.

Conclusions

Wearing MFSCLs can provide satisfactory corrected visual acuity (both distance HCVA and distance LCVA). Although the lenses increased the aberrations, such as total aberrations and higher-order aberrations, there were few adverse effects on the distance HCVA, distance LCVA and visual perception after 1 month of MFSCL use.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-OOC-17012103. Registered 23 July 2017, http://www.chictr.org.cn/usercenter.aspx

Understanding the Impact of Individual Perceived Image Quality Features on Visual Performance

Purpose

This study aimed to quantify the impact of blur, contrast, and ghosting on perceived overall image quality (IQ) as well as resultant predicted visual acuity, utilizing simulated acuity charts from objective refraction among eyes of individuals with Down syndrome (DS).

Methods

Acuity charts were produced, simulating the retinal image when applying 16 different metric-derived sphero-cylindrical refractions for each eye of 30 adult patients with DS. Fourteen dilated adult observers (normal vision) viewed subsets of logMAR acuity charts displayed on an LCD monitor monocularly through a unit magnification 3-mm aperture telescope. Observers rated features blur, ghosting, and contrast on 10-point scales (10 = poorest) and overall IQ on a 0- to 100-point scale (100 = best) and read each chart until five total letters were missed (logMAR technique). Mixed modeling was used to estimate feature influence on overall perceived IQ and relative acuity (compared with an unaberrated chart), separately.

Results

Perceived IQ spanned the entire scale (mean = 59 ± 22) and average reduction in relative acuity was two lines (0.2 ± 0.14 logMAR). Perceived blur, ghosting, and contrast were individually correlated with overall IQ and relative acuity. Blur, contrast, and ghosting exert unique effects on overall perceived IQ (P < 0.05). Blur (b = -.009, P < 0.001) and ghosting (b = -.003, P < 0.001) influence relative acuity over and beyond their effects on overall IQ (b = .001, P < 0.0001) and contrast.

Conclusions

Objectively identified refractions would ideally provide high contrast, low blur, and low ghosting. These data suggest that blur and ghosting may be given priority over contrast when improving acuity is the goal.

Translational Relevance

Findings may guide objective refraction in clinical care.

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.

Contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in subjects wearing multifocal contact lenses with high additions designed for myopia progression control

OBJECTIVES

To assess the visual performance of multifocal contact lenses (MFCLs) with high addition powers designed for myopia control.

METHODS

Twenty-four non-presbyopic adults (mean age 24 years, range 18-36 years) were fitted with soft MFCLs with add powers of +2.0 D (Add2) and +4.0 D (Add4) (RELAX, SwissLens) and single vision lenses (SVCL; Add0) in a counterbalanced order. In this double-masked study, half of the participants were randomly fitted with 3 mm-distance central zone MFCLs while the other half received 4.5 mm-distance central zone MFCLs. Visual acuity was measured at distance (3.0 m) and at near (0.4 m). Central and peripheral contrast sensitivity was evaluated at distance using the Gabor patch test. The area under the logarithmic contrast sensitivity function curve (ALCSF) was calculated and compared between the groups (i.e. different additions powers used).

RESULTS

Near and distance visual acuities were not affected by the lenses, neither Add2 nor Add4, when compared to Add0, however, CZ3 significantly reduced distance visual acuity with Add4 when compared to CZ4.5 (-0.08 logMAR vs. for CZ3 and -0.18 logMAR for CZ4.5, p = 0.013). MFCLs impaired central ALCSF only when Add2 was used (15.99 logCS for Add2 and 16.36 logCS for SVCLs, p = 0.021). Peripheral ALCSF was statistically lower for both addition powers of the MFCLs when compared to SVCLs (12.70 for Add2 and Add4, 13.73 for SVCLs, p = 0.009). The above effects were the same for both central zones used.

CONCLUSIONS

MFCLs with CZ3 diameter and high add power (Add4) slightly reduced distance visual acuity when compared to CZ4.5 but no reduction in this parameter was found with medium add power (Add2). Central contrast sensitivity was impaired only by MFCLs with the lower add power (Add2). Both add powers in the MFCLs reduced peripheral contrast sensitivity to a similar extent.

IMI - Clinical Myopia Control Trials and Instrumentation Report

The evidence-basis based on existing myopia control trials along with the supporting academic literature were reviewed; this informed recommendations on the outcomes suggested from clinical trials aimed at slowing myopia progression to show the effectiveness of treatments and the impact on patients. These outcomes were classified as primary (refractive error and/or axial length), secondary (patient reported outcomes and treatment compliance), and exploratory (peripheral refraction, accommodative changes, ocular alignment, pupil size, outdoor activity/lighting levels, anterior and posterior segment imaging, and tissue biomechanics). The currently available instrumentation, which the literature has shown to best achieve the primary and secondary outcomes, was reviewed and critiqued. Issues relating to study design and patient selection were also identified. These findings and consensus from the International Myopia Institute members led to final recommendations to inform future instrumentation development and to guide clinical trial protocols.

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.

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.

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

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance of prototype contact lenses designed via deliberate manipulation of higher-order spherical aberrations to extend-depth-of-focus with two commercial multifocals, after 1 week of lens wear.

METHODS

In a prospective, participant-masked, cross-over, randomized, 1-week dispensing clinical-trial, 43 presbyopes [age: 42-63 years] each wore AIROPTIX Aqua multifocal (AOMF), ACUVUE OASYS for presbyopia (AOP) and extended-depth-of-focus prototypes (EDOF) appropriate to their add requirements. Measurements comprised high-contrast-visual-acuity (HCVA) at 6m, 70cm, 50cm and 40cm; low-contrast-visual-acuity (LCVA) and contrast-sensitivity (CS) at 6m and stereopsis at 40cm. A self-administered questionnaire on a numeric-rating-scale (1-10) assessed subjective visual performance comprising clarity-of-vision and lack-of-ghosting at various distances during day/night-viewing conditions and overall-vision-satisfaction.

RESULTS

EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for HCVA averaged across distances (p≤0.038); significantly worse than AOMF for LCVA (p=0.021) and significantly worse than AOMF for CS in medium and high add-groups (p=0.006). None of these differences were clinically significant (≤2 letters). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for mean stereoacuity (36 and 13 seconds-of-arc, respectively: p≤0.05). For clarity-of-vision, EDOF was significantly better than AOP at all distances and AOMF at intermediate and near (p≤0.028). For lack-of-ghosting averaged across distances, EDOF was significantly better than AOP (p<0.001) but not AOMF (p=0.186). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF and AOP for overall-vision-satisfaction (p≤0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

EDOF provides better intermediate and near vision performance than either AOMF or AOP with no difference for distance vision after 1 week of lens wear.

Analysis on multifocal contact lens design based on optical power distribution with NURBS

This paper aims to develop and analyze the design method of multifocal contact lenses to obtain curvature continuity in the optical surfaces with the high addition (Add) powers by adjusting non-uniform rational B-spline (NURBS) curves. The paper has developed mathematical formulae to generate the optical power distributions in which the powers continuously change from either near or distant center to the opposite focal length in the periphery of the optical region with different change rates and Add power values. This developed method can efficiently adjust and optimize three parameters, including control points, weight, and knots of the NURBS, to be anterior optical lens surface profiles to adapt for these given power profiles. The result shows that the proposed contact lenses not only achieve smooth and continuous anterior optical surfaces, but also satisfy various optical power distributions with high Add power values for different pupil diameters. Then, these designs of contact lenses can be feasibly converted to the computer-aided design format for analysis and manufacture for molding or single-point diamond turning. Experimental results of this method have been tested and proven when both the power distributions of simulation of lenses and the actual machined samples match the original specified powers provided by clinical demands of a multifocal contact lens. Future integration with variant clinical demands and optimization rules of lens design can be explored for a progressive contact lens.

Impact of Spherical Aberration Terms on Multifocal Contact Lens Performance

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact of the primary (PSA) and secondary (SSA) spherical aberration terms on visual performance (VP) in presbyopes, as measured using multifocal (MFCL) soft contact lenses on eye.

METHODS

Seventeen presbyopes (age: 55.1 ± 6.9 years) wore seven commercial lenses (four center-near (MFCL N), one center-distance (MFCL D), one bifocal, and one single vision control). Unaided and with each lens on eye, the PSA and SSA terms were obtained with an aberrometer, the BHVI-EyeMapper (low illumination, natural and 4 mm pupil diameter). High- and low-contrast distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, high-contrast visual acuities at near, and range of clear vision were measured. In addition, subjective VP variables included clarity of vision at distance and near, ghosting, and overall vision satisfaction. Pearson's correlation was used to determine the association between the PSA and SSA terms and the VP variables.

RESULTS

PSA (natural pupil) was more negative (P < .05) with the MFCL N (mean PSA = -0.053 ± 0.080 μm) and bifocal (PSA = +0.005 ± 0.067 μm) lenses and more positive with the MFCL D lens (PSA = +0.208 ± 0.160 μm) than the control (+0.067 ± 0.072 μm). SSA (natural pupil) was significantly more positive for the MFCL N lenses (mean SSA = +0.025 ± 0.029 μm) compared to the control (SSA = -0.001 ± 0.017 μm). PSA and SSA terms were significantly (P < .05) correlated with 78% and 56% of VP variables, respectively, but the correlation coefficients were weak, ranging between |0.210| and |0.334|. Although distance variables showed improved VP with more positive PSA or negative SSA, most near variables showed improved VP with more negative PSA. Range of clear focus was greater for more negative PSA terms.

CONCLUSIONS

The amount and direction of PSA and SSA terms, as measured with different MFCLs on eye, can affect VP at different distances. Results of this study may provide useful information when designing new or optimize existing MFCLs for improved VP at specific distances.

Short-term comparison between extended depth-of-focus prototype contact lenses and a commercially-available center-near multifocal

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance of prototype contact lenses which extend depth-of-focus (EDOF) by deliberate manipulation of multiple higher-order spherical aberration terms and a commercially-available center-near lens (AIR OPTIX Aqua Multifocal, AOMF).

METHODS

This was a prospective, cross-over, randomized, single-masked (participant), short-term clinical trial where 52 participants (age 45-70 years) were stratified as low, medium or high presbyopes and wore EDOF and AOMF on different days. Objective measures comprised high and low contrast visual acuity (HCVA/LCVA, logMAR), and contrast sensitivity (log units) at 6m; HCVA at 70cm, 50cm and 40cm and stereopsis (seconds of arc) at 40cm. HCVA at 70cm, 50cm and 40cm were measured as "comfortable acuity" rather than conventional resolution acuity. Subjective measures comprised clarity-of-vision and ghosting at distance, intermediate and near, overall vision satisfaction and ocular comfort (1-10 numeric rating scale) and lens purchase (yes/no response). Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, paired t-tests and McNemar's test.

RESULTS

Significant differences between lens types were independent of strata (p≥0.119). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF for HCVA at 40cm (0.42±0.18 vs. 0.48±0.22, p=0.024), stereopsis (98±88 vs. 141±114, p<0.001), clarity-of-vision at intermediate (8.5±1.6 vs. 7.7±1.9, p=0.006) and near (7.3±2.5 vs. 6.2±2.5, p=0.005), lack-of-ghosting (p=0.012), overall vision satisfaction (7.5±1.7 vs. 6.4±2.2, p<0.001) and ocular comfort (9.0±1.0 vs. 8.3±1.7, p=0.002). Significantly more participants chose to only-purchase EDOF (33% vs. 6%, p=0.003).). There were no significant differences between lens types for any objective measure at 6m or clarity-of-vision at distance (p≥0.356).

CONCLUSIONS

EDOF provides better intermediate and near vision performance in presbyopes than AOMF with no difference for distance vision during short-term wear.

Short-Term Visual Performance of Novel Extended Depth-of-Focus Contact Lenses

PURPOSE

To compare the objective and subjective visual performance of a novel contact lens which extends depth of focus by deliberate manipulation of higher-order spherical aberrations and a commercially available zonal-refractive multifocal lens.

METHODS

A prospective, cross-over, randomized, single-masked, short-term clinical trial comprising 41 presbyopes (age 45 to 70 years) wearing novel Extended Depth of Focus lenses (EDOF) and ACUVUE OAYS for Presbyopia (AOP). Each design was assessed on different days with a minimum overnight wash-out. Objective measures comprised high-contrast visual acuity (HCVA, logMAR) at 6 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, and 40 cm; low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA, logMAR) and contrast sensitivity (log units) at 6 m; and stereopsis (seconds of arc) at 40 cm. HCVA at 70 cm, 50 cm, and 40 cm were measured as "comfortable acuity" rather than conventional resolution acuity. Subjective performance was assessed on a 1-10 numeric rating scale for clarity of vision and ghosting at distance, intermediate and near, overall vision satisfaction, ocular comfort, and lens purchase. Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA and paired t tests.

RESULTS

HCVA, clarity of vision, and ghosting with EDOF were significantly better than AOP (p < 0.01); however, differences were dependent on testing distances and add groups. Post hoc analysis showed EDOF was significantly better than AOP for HCVA at 70 cm (0.11 ± 0.11 vs. 0.21 ± 0.16, p < 0.001), 50 cm (0.26 ± 0.17 vs. 0.36 ± 0.18, p = 0.003), 40 cm (0.42 ± 0.17 vs. 0.52 ± 0.21, p = 0.001), and LCVA at 6 m (0.22 ± 0.08 vs. 0.27 ± 0.12, p = 0.024). EDOF was significantly better than AOP for clarity of vision at distance (7.7 ± 1.6 vs. 6.8 ± 2.3, p = 0.029), intermediate (8.8 ± 1.4 vs. 7.0 ± 2.2, p < 0.001), and near (7.4 ± 2.4 vs. 5.2 ± 2.7, p < 0.001), ghosting at distance (9.1 ± 1.2 vs. 8.1 ± 2.5, p = 0.005), and overall vision satisfaction (7.6 ± 1.6 vs. 6.0 ± 2.6, p < 0.001). More participants chose to purchase EDOF compared to AOP (61 vs. 39%) and significantly more chose to only-purchase EDOF compared to only-purchase AOP (27 vs. 5%, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with AOP, EDOF lenses provide better intermediate and near vision performance in presbyopic participants without compromising distance vision.

Association between multifocal soft contact lens decentration and visual performance

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the association between decentration of several commercial multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCLs) and various objective and subjective visual performance variables in presbyopic and non-presbyopic participants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All presbyopic (age >40 years, near add ≥+1.25 D) and non-presbyopic (age ≥18 years, no near add requirements, spherical equivalent ≤-0.50 D) participants were each fitted bilaterally with six and two MFCLs (test lens), respectively, and with one single vision lens (control lens). Lens decentration, ie, the x- and y-differences between the contact lens and pupil centers, was objectively determined. Third-order aberrations were measured and compared. Visual performance (high- and low-contrast acuities and several subjective variables) was analyzed for any associations (Pearson's correlation, r) with MFCL decentration.

RESULTS

A total of 17 presbyopic (55.1±6.9 years) and eight non-presbyopic (31.0±3.3 years) participants completed the study. All lenses displayed a temporal-inferior decentration (x=-0.36±0.29 mm, y=-0.28±0.28 mm, mean ± SD). Compared to the control, a significant inferior decentration was found for the Proclear® MFCL Near lens in both groups (ypresbyopic =-0.26 mm, ynon-presbyopic =-0.70 mm) and for the Proclear® MFCL Distance lens in the non-presbyopic group (ynon-presbyopic =-0.69 mm). In both groups, lens-induced vertical coma (C(3, -1)) was, by at least tenfold, significantly more positive for the Proclear® MFCL Distance lens and significantly more negative for the Proclear® MFCL Near lens. In the presbyopic group, the correlation of total MFCL decentration with vision variables was weak (r<|0.191|). Conversely, a moderate but significant correlation with total MFCL decentration was found in the non-presbyopic group for most of the vision variables, indicating a decrease in vision as decentration increased.

CONCLUSION

Certain MFCLs decentered more than others; the same lens designs also induced significant amounts of third-order aberrations. An association between MFCL decentration and seven out of nine vision variables was found in the non-presbyopic group, ie, the group where lenses were most decentered, which had larger pupils and lower levels of inherent third-order aberrations.

Pupil diameter, working distance and illumination during habitual tasks. Implications for simultaneous vision contact lenses for presbyopia

PURPOSE

To determine working distance, pupil diameter and illumination in real life conditions in a sample of presbyopic participants performing habitual tasks.

METHODS

A total of 59 presbyopic subjects (aged between 45 and 63 years) with different occupational backgrounds participated in the study. Participants were first interviewed regarding their habitual tasks with the aid of an ad hoc questionnaire, following which in-office photopic and mesopic pupil diameter was determined. Pupil diameter was also evaluated while participants conducted each of the self-reported habitual tasks by taking a photograph, which was later submitted to image analysis. In addition, working distance was determined with a measuring tape and the illumination that reached the pupil during each of the different tasks was measured, in lux, with a light meter.

RESULTS

The four most common habitual tasks were computer use, reading, sewing and sports. A high intersubject variability was found in pupil diameter, working distance and illumination conditions while conducting the same task. Statistically significant differences were found between the in-office measured photopic and mesopic pupil diameters and those obtained while participants were conducting their habitual tasks in real life conditions (all p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Potential multifocal contact lens users may present with different ages, different jobs or hobbies and different preferences regarding lighting conditions and working distances. This results in different pupil size, even within the same task. This information may be critical when selecting a particular lens design and add power. Eye care practitioners are therefore advised to assess pupil diameter in real life conditions.

Surgical compensation of presbyopia with corneal inlays

Presbyopia, the physiological change in near vision that develops with ageing, gradually affects individuals older than 40 years and is a growing cause of visual disability due to ageing demographics of the global population. The routine use of computers and 'smartphones', combined with the affluence of the 'baby boomers' generation has set high standards for near vision correction. Corneal inlays are a relatively new treatment modality that is effective at compensating for presbyopia. The dimensions of these devices vary from 2 to 3.8 mm in diameter and 5 to 32 μm in thickness. They are implanted in the anterior corneal stroma of the non-dominant eye, most commonly, in a femtosecond laser created corneal pocket. They improve near vision by increasing the depth of focus, creating a hyper-prolate region of increased central cornea power or providing a refractive add power. This article reviews the literature on the efficacy and safety of corneal inlays.