PurposeWe aimed to determine myopia control efficacy with novel contact lenses (CL) that (1) reduced both central and peripheral defocus, and (2) provided extended depth of focus with better global retinal image quality for points on, and anterior to, the retina and degraded for points posterior to the retina.MethodsChildren (n = 508, 8–13 years) with cycloplegic spherical equivalent (SE) −0.75 to −3.50D were enrolled in a prospective, double blind trial and randomised to one of five groups: (1) single vision, silicone hydrogel (SH) CL; (2) two groups wearing SH CL that imposed myopic defocus across peripheral and central retina (test CL I and II; +1.00D centrally and +2.50 and +1.50 for CL I and II at 3 mm semi‐chord respectively); and (3) two groups wearing extended depth of focus (EDOF) hydrogel CL incorporating higher order aberrations to modulate retinal image quality (test CL III and IV; extended depth of focus of up to +1.75D and +2.50D respectively). Cycloplegic autorefraction and axial length (AL) measurements were conducted at six monthly intervals. Compliance to lens wear was assessed with a diary and collected at each visit. Additionally, subjective responses to various aspects of lens wear were assessed. The trial commenced in February 2014 and was terminated in January 2017 due to site closure. Myopia progression over time between groups was compared using linear mixed models and where needed post hoc analysis with Bonferroni corrections conducted.ResultsMyopia progressed with control CL −1.12 ± 0.51D/0.58 ± 0.27 mm for SE/AL at 24 months. In comparison, all test CL had reduced progression with SE/AL ranging from −0.78D to −0.87D/0.41–0.46 mm at 24 months (AL: p < 0.05 for all test CL; SE p < 0.05 for test CL III and IV) and represented a reduction in axial length elongation of about 22% to 32% and reduction in spherical equivalent of 24% to 32%. With test CL, a greater slowing ranging from 26% to 43% was observed in compliant wearers (≥6 days per week; Control CL: −0.64D/0.30 mm and −1.14D/0.58 mm vs test CL: −0.42D to −0.47D/0.12–0.18 mm and −0.70 to −0.81D/0.19–0.25 mm at 12 and 24 months respectively).ConclusionsContact lenses that either imposed myopic defocus at the retina or modulated retinal image quality resulted in a slower progression of myopia with greater efficacy seen in compliant wearers. Importantly, there was no difference in the myopia control provided by either of these strategies.
SIGNIFICANCE This study demonstrates that mean axial length/corneal radius of curvature ratio (AL/CR) can be used to detect low and high myopia but cannot clinically monitor myopia progression because the relationship between AL/CR and progression in myopia is different between low and high myopia. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of AL/CR with magnitude and progression of myopia. METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted comparing the right eyes of those with high myopia (n = 308; age, 7 to 16 years; myopia sphere, −6.00 diopters or worse) with those with low myopia (n = 732; age, 7 to 16 years; myopia sphere, between −0.50 and −3.50 diopters; cylinder, ≤1.00 diopters). Baseline axial length, corneal radii of curvature, and cycloplegic objective refraction were analyzed. Myopia progression in the low-myopia group at 6- and 12-month follow-up was measured, and the differences in slopes of AL/CR were compared for slow (<0.75 diopters) and fast progressing (≥0.75 diopters). RESULTS Mean AL/CR values were significantly different (P < .001) between high myopia (3.46 ± 0.10) and low myopia (3.16 ± 0.07). In high and low myopia, slopes of axial length versus corneal curvature radius were not significantly different (P > .05), and slopes of AL/CR versus spherical equivalent were significantly different after adjusting for spherical equivalent and age (P < .05). Slopes of AL/CR progression and spherical equivalent progression were significantly different in low myopia between fast and slow progressing (P < .001), but the relationship between progression in AL/CR and progression in spherical equivalent was not strong. CONCLUSIONS The AL/CR can be used to classify different grades of myopia, but it is not useful in determining the magnitude of myopia or monitoring progression because AL/CR is not linearly related to spherical equivalent and because progression in AL/CR is not strongly related to spherical equivalent progression.
ObjectivesTo report on: (a) overall myopia and high myopia prevalence, and (b) the impact of education on the spherical equivalent refractive error in children across Shanghai.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingAcross all 17 districts of Shanghai.Participants910 245 children aged 4–14 years from a school-based survey conducted between 2012 and 2013.Main outcome measuresData of children with non-cycloplegic autorefraction, visual acuity assessment and questionnaire were analysed (67%, n=6 06 476). Prevalence of myopia (≤−1.0 D) and high myopia (≤−5.0 D) was determined. We used a regression discontinuity design to determine the impact of school entry cut-off date (1 September) by comparing refractive errors at each age, for children born pre-September to post-1 September, and performed a multivariate analysis to explore risk factors associated with myopia. Data analysis was performed in 2017–2018.ResultsPrevalence rates of myopia and high myopia were 32.9% (95% CI: 32.8% to 33.1%) and 4.2% (95% CI: 4.1% to 4.2%), respectively. From 6 years of age onwards, children born pre-September were more myopic compared with those born post-1 September (ahead in school by 1 year, discontinuity at 6 years: −0.19 D (95% CI: −0.09 to −0.30 D); 14 years: −0.67 D (95% CI: −0.21 to −1.14 D)).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that myopia is associated with education, that is primarily focused on near-based activities. Efforts to reduce the burden should be directed to public awareness, reform of education and health systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.