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.

Computerised dynamic posturography for postural control assessment in subjects wearing multifocal contact lenses dedicated for myopia control.

PURPOSE: To measure body balance using computerised dynamic posturography in young adults wearing multifocal contact lenses (MFCL) with high addition powers designed for myopia control. METHODS: Twenty-four young adults (mean age: 24 years) wearing distance-centred soft MFCL (SwissLens Orbis Relax) with two different central zones (3 and 4.5 mm), two addition powers (+2 D, +4 D) and single vision control lenses. Body balance was measured on a moving platform under three viewing conditions: (1) eyes open when fixating on letters at 3 m or (2) at 40 cm, as well as (3) with the eyes closed. Parameters of body stabilisation were analysed: the rate of body stabilisation (τrelax ), the stabilisation time (Tmax ) and the number of oscillations (Nosc ). RESULTS: The MFCLs did not produce a significant difference in the mean values of the analysed parameters (p > 0.05 for τrelax, Tmax, Nosc ). However, a positive correlation was found between pupil size and Nosc and Tmax (p < 0.01), suggesting an effect of the +4 D add with the 3 mm central zone on the posturographic parameters. As was expected, dynamic body stabilisation was better with eyes open versus eyes closed (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Distance-centred MFCLs with a medium addition (+2 D) do not disturb body stabilisation in young adults. However, high additions (+4 D) with a small central zone may affect body balance control in subjects with large pupil size.

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.