Comparing the relative peripheral refraction effect of single vision and multifocal contact lenses measured using an autorefractor and an aberrometer: A pilot study

Bakaraju, Ravi C.; Fedtke, Cathleen; Ehrmann, Klaus; Ho, Arthur

doi:10.1016/j.optom.2015.01.005

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the contrary, Omafilcon A MFCL N was the worst performing and most inferiorly decentered lens. Significant inferior contact lens decentration with Omafilcon A MFCLs has been reported previously 28 , 35 and may be due to a general looser fit with those lenses. It has been shown that a significant decentration can lead to an increase in odd higher-order aberrations, 28 which could have adversely affected the visual performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Visual performance with multifocal soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopic eyes during an adaptation period

Fedtke¹,

Ehrmann²,

Thomas³

et al. 2016

OPTO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeMultifocal soft contact lenses (MFCLs) have been proposed and used for controlling the rate of myopia progression; however, little is known on the performance and adaptation with MFCLs in non-presbyopes. This study aims to evaluate the visual performance of four commercially available MFCLs in non-presbyopic myopic eyes during an adaptation period.MethodsFifty-two experienced myopic contact lens wearers (67% female; mean age 21.4±2.0 years) were enrolled in this trial and 40 completed the trial. Twenty-six participants (Group 1) wore Lotrafilcon B single vision (SV, control), Omafilcon A MFCL center-distance (D) and center-near (N) and the other 26 participants (Group 2) wore Lotrafilcon B SV, Lotrafilcon B MFCL N, and Balafilcon A MFCL N. Lens order was randomized. Participants wore each allocated lens for a minimum of 8 days over four scheduled visits (dispensing and three follow-up visits) with a 1-week washout period between the lens types. At each visit, high-contrast visual acuity (HCVA) (in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) and seven subjective performance variables (via questionnaire) were obtained. Power profiles of each lens type, pupil size, and contact lens centration, with lens placed on the eye, were measured.ResultsThe SV control outperformed the MFCLs in all variables (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in HCVA over time, with the exception of monocular HCVA with Omafilcon A MFCL N, which at the end of the adaptation period had significantly (P<0.05) improved by 0.10 logMAR. No differences were found between visits for any subjective variables. Subjectively, Lotrafilcon B MFCL N performed best and was the only lens that did not decenter significantly compared to the SV control. Conversely, Omafilcon A MFCL N was the worst performing and most decentered lens (P<0.05, y=−0.39 mm), with the greatest plus area under the power profile.ConclusionMFCLs with greatest power variation across the optic zone, a greater plus area under the distance labeled power profile, and/or lenses that were significantly decentered resulted in the lowest subjective ratings. Over time, quality of vision with MFCLs did not change in non-presbyopic myopic participants, with the exception of Omafilcon A MFCL N, which showed some adaptation effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Visual performance with multifocal soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopic eyes during an adaptation period

Fedtke¹,

Ehrmann²,

Thomas³

et al. 2016

OPTO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An alternative method of measuring refraction is with the Hartmann Shack aberrometer, for which measurements are taken through the entire pupil area and components of refraction are calculated based on the lower and higher order aberration values (even radial orders, preferably up to 6th order) which might provide a more accurate representation. Bakaraju et al 35 have found some considerable differences, when wearing contact lenses, between peripheral refractions with a Shin-Nippon NVision 5001 (Grand-Seiko, Toyko), which is similar to the Grand-Seiko WAM-5000, and a Hartmann-Shack instrument (COAS-HD, Wavefront Sciences, Albuquerque, USA). Lens type* F 2.3,40.9 = 7.7 p = 0.001 F 1.9,33.5 = 14.1 p < 0.001 F 2.3,41.7 = 10.0 p < 0.001 Test method F 1,18 = 0.2 p = 0.518 F 1,18 = 1.5 p = 0.24 F 1,18 = 2.5 p = 0.13 Visual field angle F 2.6,45.9 = 59.1 p = 0.010 F 2.8,50.3 = 41.2 p < 0.001 F 2.4,42.6 = 5.1 p = 0.007 Refraction group F 1,18 = 4.2 p = 0.056 F 1,18 = 0.5 p = 0.3 F 1,18 = 2.9 p = 0.105 Lens type 9 Test method F 2.2,40.1 = 1.6 p = 0.22 F 3,54 = 0.6 p = 0.62 F 3,54 = 3.8 p = 0.016 Test method 9 Visual field angle F 6.2,111.1 = 2.5 p = 0.025 F 5.2,93.8 = 0.7 p = 0.65 F 4.9,88.1 = 1.1 p = 0.36 Visual field angle 9 Refraction group F 3.9,69.7 = 2.7 p = 0.037 F 4.7,84.9 = 1.1 p = 0.37 F 4.4,79.8 = 1.2 p = 0.32 p Values < 0.004 are bolded.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of eye rotation and contact lens decentration on horizontal peripheral refraction

Jaisankar

Leube

Gifford

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Peripheral refraction is important in design of myopia control therapies. The aim was to investigate the influence of contact lens decentration associated with eye rotation on peripheral refraction in the horizontal visual field. Methods Participants were 10 emmetropes and 10 myopes in good general and ocular health. Right eyes underwent cycloplegic peripheral refraction, using a Grand‐Seiko WAM‐5500 Autorefractor, in 5° steps to ±35° eccentricities along the horizontal visual field. Targets were fixated using eye rotation only or head rotation only. Refractions were measured without correction and with three types of contact lenses: single vision, a multifocal centre‐distance aspheric with +2.50 D add and NaturalVue aspheric. Photographs of eyes during lens wear were taken for each eye rotation. Effects of visual field angle, lens type and test method (head or eye rotation) on vector components of relative peripheral refraction were evaluated using repeated measures anovas. Test method for each visual field angle/lens combination were compared via paired t‐tests. Results Horizontal decentration ranges across the visual field were 1.2 ± 0.6 mm for single vision and 1.2 ± 0.4 mm for multifocal lenses but smaller at 0.7 ± 0.4 mm for NaturalVue lenses. There were only two significant effects of test method across the visual field angle/lens type combinations (single vision: for emmetropes horizontal/vertical astigmatism component at 35° nasal with mean difference −0.38 D and for myopes spherical equivalent refraction at 20° temporal with mean difference +0.24 D). Conclusion Upon eye rotation the contact lenses decentred on the eye, but not enough to affect peripheral refraction. For the types assessed and for the horizontal visual field out to ±35° when measurements were performed with the Grand‐Seiko WAM‐5500 autorefractor, it is valid to use eye rotations to investigate peripheral refraction.

show abstract

“…Increased decentration of Proclear ® MFCL has been noticed earlier. 11 , 14 Lens parameters such as BC and CL Dia in combination with the related ocular parameters of the individual CCs and HVIDs can provide an indication of the differences found in lens centration. 21 Results from the current study showed that, independent of the group, the ratio of CC/BC and the ratio of HVID/CL Dia of the Proclear ® MFCLs were significantly smaller when compared to the control lens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Differences in ocular and lens design parameters, ie, base curve (BC) and diameter, and material properties can affect the fit of MFCLs and thereby lens centration. It has been reported 11 , 14 that some MFCLs (ie, Proclear ® MFCLs; CooperVision, Pleasanton, CA, USA) decentered more than others and that vision with those lenses was also more reduced. Based on these observations, it has been suggested that decentration of MFCLs might impact vision.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between multifocal soft contact lens decentration and visual performance

Fedtke

Ehrmann

Thomas

et al. 2016

OPTO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe 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 methodsAll 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionCertain 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.

show abstract

Comparing the relative peripheral refraction effect of single vision and multifocal contact lenses measured using an autorefractor and an aberrometer: A pilot study

Cited by 16 publications

References 20 publications

Visual performance with multifocal soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopic eyes during an adaptation period

Visual performance with multifocal soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopic eyes during an adaptation period

Effects of eye rotation and contact lens decentration on horizontal peripheral refraction

Association between multifocal soft contact lens decentration and visual performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About