Impact of zone geometry on the introduction of myopic defocus in young adult eyes wearing multi-zone lenses.

PURPOSE: Multizone contact lenses control myopia progression by proposed introduction of myopic defocus. This project investigated how much of the pupil area and how many dioptres of myopic defocus are introduced by different lens zone geometries with near- and off-axis viewing. METHODS: Ten young myopic adults (18-25 years) binocularly wore four soft contact lenses including a single vision (SV), concentric-ring dual-focus (DF), centre-distance multifocal (MF) and a RingBoost™ (RB) multi-zone design containing a combination of coaxial and non-coaxial zones. A modified aberrometer captured aberrations and pupil sizes at four target vergences between -0.25 and -4.00 D (on-axis) and across the central ±30° of the horizontal retina (off-axis). Defocus was quantified as the difference between the measured refractive state and the target vergence within each zone of a multi-zone design within the pupil and compared with that of equivalent zone areas of the SV lens. The percentage of the pupil containing myopic defocused light for each lens was calculated. RESULTS: Defocus within the distance correction zones of multi-zone lenses was similar to that of the SV lens. When viewing on-axis at -0.25 D target vergence, on average 11% of the pupil was myopic with SV, whereas 62%, 84% and 50% of the pupil was myopic for the DF, MF and RB designs, respectively. At -4.00 D target vergence, all lenses exhibited a systematic decrease in the percentage of pupil area having myopic defocus (SV: 3%; DF: 18%; MF: 5% and RB: 26%). The off-axis proportions were similar across multi-zone lenses; however, multi-zone lenses retained approximately 1.25-3.0× more myopic defocus than the SV lens. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects accommodated using the distance-correction zones of multi-zone lenses. Multi-zone contact lenses introduced significant myopic defocus on-axis and across the central ±30° retina. However, the magnitude and proportion of defocus were influenced by zone geometry, add power and pupil size.

Modelling the refractive and imaging impact of multi-zone lenses utilised for myopia control in children's eyes.

PURPOSE: To develop an optical model of a child's eye to reveal the impact of target distance and accommodative behaviour on retinal image quality when fitted with multi-zone lenses. METHODS: Pupil size, aberration levels and accommodative lag were adjusted for models viewing stimuli at 400, 100, 33 and 20 cm. Distributions of defocus across the pupil and simulated retinal images were obtained. An equivalent 16-point letter was imaged at near viewing distances, while a 0.00 logMAR (6/6) letter was imaged at 400 cm. Multi-zone lenses included those clinically utilised for myopia control (e.g., dual-focus, multi-segmented and aspherical optics). RESULTS: Viewing distance adjustments to model spherical aberration (SA) and pupil radius resulted in a model eye with wider defocus distributions at closer viewing distances, especially at 20 cm. The increasing negative SA at near reduced the effective add power of dual-focus lenses, reducing the amount of myopic defocus introduced by the centre-distance, 2-zone design. The negative SA at near largely compensated for the high positive SA introduced by the aspheric lens, removing most myopic defocus when viewing at near. A 0.50 D accommodative lag had little impact on the legibility of typical text (16-point) at the closer viewing distances. CONCLUSIONS: All four multi-zone lenses successfully generated myopic defocus at greater viewing distances, but two failed to introduce significant amounts of myopic defocus at the nearest viewing distance due to the combined effects of pupil miosis and negative SA. Typical 16-point type is easily legible at near even in presence of the multi-zone optics of lenses utilised for myopia control and accommodative lag.

Accommodative Behavior, Hyperopic Defocus, and Retinal Image Quality in Children Viewing Electronic Displays.

SIGNIFICANCE: The prevalence of myopia and use of electronic displays by children has grown rapidly in recent years. We found that children viewing electronic displays, however, experience hyperopic defocus levels similar to those previously reported for other stimuli. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare accommodative behavior of nonmyopic and myopic children viewing a computer screen or mobile phone. METHODS: Accommodative behavior was examined in 11 nonmyopic and 8 myopic children (11.32 ± 2.90 and 14.13 ± 2.30 years, respectively; P = .04; refractions, +0.51 ± 0.51 and -2.54 ± 1.29, respectively) using an open-field autorefractor (Grand Seiko) at target vergences from -0.25 to -5.00 D. Different size (scaled or nonscaled) and type (text or movie) stimuli were presented on an LCD monitor (distant) or an iPhone (near), with subjects viewing monocularly or binocularly in an illuminated or dark room. RESULTS: At the typical reading distances (20 and 33 cm), all 19 children exhibited some amount of accommodative lag. Stimulus type had little impact on accommodation. However, slightly but statistically significant lower slopes were observed (Bonferroni-corrected significance level of P ≤ .01) for low room lighting (0.96 vs. 0.91; t test, t = 3.88; P = .003), nonscaled targets (0.99 vs. 0.92; t test, t = 4.28; P = .001), and monocular viewing (0.99 vs. 0.90; t test, t = 4.0; P = .002) in the nonmyopic group only. When viewing nonscaled stimuli binocularly (natural viewing), the means and standard deviations of accommodative lags (averaged across room lights on and off, and text and movie) were generally larger for the nonmyopes at all distances and were largest at 33 cm (0.73 ± 0.18 D for the nonmyopes and 0.49 ± 0.23 for the myopes; t test, t = 2.62; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Generally small (≤0.50 D) amounts of hyperopic defocus are present in children binocularly viewing handheld electronic devices (nonmyopes slightly more than myopes). Modern electronic devices do not expose children to unusually high levels of hyperopic defocus.

Multifocal electroretinogram responses in Nepalese diabetic patients without retinopathy.

PURPOSE: To determine neuroretinal function with multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) in diabetic subjects without retinopathy. METHODS: Multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) was performed in 18 eyes of 18 diabetic subjects without retinopathy and 17 eyes of 17 age and gender-matched healthy control participants. Among 18 diabetic subjects, two had type 1 and 16 had type 2 diabetes. MfERG responses were averaged by the retinal areas of six concentric rings and four quadrants, and 103 retinal locations; N1-P1 amplitude and P1-implicit time were analysed. RESULTS: Average mfERG N1-P1 amplitude (in nv/deg(2)) of 103 retinal locations was 56.3 ± 17.2 (mean ± SD) in type 1 diabetic subjects, 47.2 ± 9.3 in type 2 diabetic subjects and 71.5 ± 12.7 in controls. Average P1-implicit time (in ms) was 43.0 ± 1.3 in type 1 diabetic subjects, 43.9 ± 2.3 in type 2 diabetic subjects and 41.9 ± 2.1 in controls. There was significant reduction in average N1-P1 amplitude and delay in P1-implicit time in type 2 diabetic subjects in comparison to controls. mfERG amplitude did not show any significant correlation with diabetes duration and blood sugar level. However, implicit time showed a positive correlation with diabetes duration in type 2 diabetic subjects with diabetes duration ≥5 years. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study in a Nepalese population with diabetes using multifocal electroretinography. We present novel findings that mfERG N1-P1 amplitude is markedly reduced along with delay in P1-implicit time in type 2 diabetic subjects without retinopathy. These findings indicate that there might be significant dysfunction of inner retina before the development of diabetic retinopathy in the study population, which have higher prevalence of diabetes than the global estimate and uncontrolled blood sugar level.

Marfan's syndrome: a refractive challenge for optometrists.

We present an interesting case of a child with Marfan's syndrome with ectopia lentis, who was followed for five years. The changes in refractive and visual findings of this child during this period are discussed. The importance of careful oculo-visual examination and possible management options in such children are highlighted.