Low toric soft contact lens acceptance study

Gaib, Sara; Vasudevan, Balamurali

doi:10.1016/j.clae.2015.01.009

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also consistent with these studies, Cho et al 5 found a 5.5-letter (1-line) improvement in low-contrast visual acuity with toric contact lenses versus spherical contact lenses in subjects with −0.75 to −1.25 D of astigmatism; subjects also rated their vision as better with toric contact lenses. Although a recent study by Gaib and Vasudevan 20 did not find meaningful improvements in vision with custom toric contact lenses compared with spherical contact lenses, their study included cylinder amounts of −0.50 to −1.00 DC with 60% of subjects only having −0.50 of astigmatism. By contrast, this study excluded subjects with only −0.50 D of astigmatism, and the subjects had a mean cylindrical refractive error of −1.28±0.36 DC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The improvements in high- and low-contrast visual acuities observed in this study were in agreement with previous studies. 4–6,20 Morgan et al evaluated toric contact lenses compared with aspheric soft contact lenses in subjects with −0.75 to −1.00 D of astigmatism and found a 2- to 5-letter improvement in high-contrast visual acuity with toric contact lenses only, depending on the pupil size. The same study also found a 1-line improvement in low-contrast visual acuity, similar to our study with toric contact lenses versus spherical contact lenses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Toric Versus Spherical Contact Lenses on Vision and Eyestrain

Berntsen

Cox

Bickle

et al. 2019

Eye &Amp; Contact Lens: Science &Amp; Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:To compare the effect of toric versus spherical soft contact lenses on objective measures of visual performance using visual acuity and electromyography of the orbicularis oculi muscle.Methods:Current soft contact lens wearers with −0.75 to −1.75 D astigmatism in each eye were binocularly fitted with toric (1-Day ACUVUE MOIST for astigmatism) and spherical (1-Day ACUVUE MOIST) contact lenses in random order. After each fitting and at 1-week follow-up, high- and low-contrast visual acuities were measured. Electromyography was used to objectively evaluate eyestrain. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences between toric and spherical contact lenses.Results:The mean age (±SD) of the 60 participants was 27.5±5.0 years, spherical refractive error was −3.68±2.01 D, and cylinder was −1.28±0.36 D. High- and low-contrast visual acuities with toric lenses were better than with spherical lenses at both fitting (toric high-contrast: −0.065±0.078 and low-contrast: 0.133±0.103 vs. spherical high-contrast: 0.001±0.104 and low-contrast: 0.224±0.107) and follow-up (toric high-contrast: −0.083±0.087 and low-contrast: 0.108±0.107 vs. spherical high-contrast: −0.015±0.095 and low-contrast: 0.211±0.104) (all P<0.0001). Electromyography-measured eyestrain was less with toric versus spherical contact lenses at fitting (least-square ratio of toric over spherical=0.72; P=0.0019) but not at follow-up (ratio=0.86; P=0.11).Conclusion:These results suggest that toric contact lenses provided improved objective measures of vision in a low-to-moderate astigmatic population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%