Advertisement

Visual performance of single vision and multifocal contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopic eyes

  • Cathleen Fedtke
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Ravi C. Bakaraju
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Level 5, Rupert Myers NW, Gate 14, University of New South Wales, Barker Street, Kensington, NSW 2052 Australia. Fax: +61 02 93857401.
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Klaus Ehrmann
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia

    School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jiyoon Chung
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Varghese Thomas
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Brien A. Holden
    Affiliations
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Level 4, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia

    School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, North Wing, Rupert Myers Building, Gate 14, Barker Street, UNSW, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
    Search for articles by this author

      Highlights

      • Single vision lens design differences had no impact on subjective vision.
      • Visual acuity was better with lenses having increased negative spherical aberration.
      • Most lenses featuring multifocality decreased visual performance.
      • De-centered lenses reduced vision ratings scores.
      • Subjective measures more sensitive indicators of quality of vision.

      Abstract

      Purpose

      To assess visual performance of single vision and multifocal soft contact lenses.

      Methods

      At baseline, forty-four myopic participants (aged 18–35 years) were fitted bilaterally with a control lens (AirOptix Aqua). At the four follow-up visits, a total of 16 study lenses (5 single vision, 11 multifocal lenses) were fitted contralaterally. After 1 h of lens wear, participants rated (scale 1–10) vision clarity (distance, intermediate and near), magnitude of ghosting at distance, comfort during head movement, and overall comfort. Distance high contrast visual acuity (HCVA), central refraction and higher order aberrations, and contact lens centration were measured.

      Results

      For single vision lenses, vision ratings were not significantly different to the control (p > 0.005). The control outperformed Acuvue Oasys, Clariti Monthly and Night and Day in HCVA (mean VA: −0.10 ± 0.07 logMAR, p < 0.005). Most refraction and higher order aberration measures were not different between lenses. The Night and Day lens showed greatest differences compared to the control, i.e., C[4, 0] was more positive (p < 0.005) at distance (Δ = 0.019 μm) and near (Δ = 0.028 μm). For multifocal lenses, the majority of vision ratings (84%) were better with the control (p < 0.005). HCVA was better with the control (p < 0.005). Proclear Multifocal lenses showed greatest differences for M, C[3, −1] and C[4, 0] at distance and near, and were inferiorly de-centered (p < 0.005).

      Conclusion

      Design differences between single vision lenses had a small impact on visual performance. Lenses featuring multifocality decreased visual performance, in particular when power variations across the optic zone were large and/or the lens was significantly de-centered.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Contact Lens and Anterior Eye
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bar Dayan Y.
        • Levin A.
        • Morad Y.
        • et al.
        The changing prevalence of myopia in young adults: a 13-year series of population-based prevalence surveys.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005; 468: 2760-2765
        • Perera S.A.
        • Wong T.Y.
        • Tay W.T.
        • et al.
        Refractive error, axial dimensions, and primary open-angle glaucoma: the Singapore Malay Eye Study.
        Arch. Ophthalmol. 2010; 1287: 900-905
        • Wong T.Y.
        • Klein B.E.
        • Klein R.
        • et al.
        Refractive errors and incident cataracts: the Beaver Dam Eye Study.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2001; 427: 1449-1454
        • Baba T.
        • Ohno-Matsui K.
        • Futagami S.
        • et al.
        Prevalence and characteristics of foveal retinal detachment without macular hole in high myopia.
        Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2003; 1353: 338-342
        • Wagner S.
        • Conrad F.
        • Bakaraju R.C.
        • et al.
        Power profiles of single vision and multifocal soft contact lenses.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2014;
        • Rae S.M.
        • Allen P.M.
        • Radhakrishnan H.
        • et al.
        Increasing negative spherical aberration with soft contact lenses improves high and low contrast visual acuity in young adults.
        Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2009; 296: 593-601
        • Gwiazda J.E.
        • Hyman L.
        • Norton T.T.
        • et al.
        Accommodation and related risk factors associated with myopia progression and their interaction with treatment in COMET children.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004; 457: 2143-2151
        • Gwiazda J.
        • Thorn F.
        • Bauer J.
        • et al.
        Myopic children show insufficient accommodative response to blur.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1993; 343: 690-694
        • Mutti D.O.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        • Hayes J.R.
        • et al.
        Accommodative lag before and after the onset of myopia.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006; 473: 837-846
        • Abbott M.L.
        • Schmid K.L.
        • Strang N.C.
        Differences in the accommodation stimulus response curves of adult myopes and emmetropes.
        Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 1998; 181: 13-20
        • Smith 3rd, E.L.
        • Kee C.S.
        • Ramamirtham R.
        • et al.
        Peripheral vision can influence eye growth and refractive development in infa.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005; 4611: 3965-3972
        • Mutti D.O.
        • Hayes J.R.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        • et al.
        Refractive error, axial length, and relative peripheral refractive error before and after the onset of myopia.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007; 486: 2510-2519
        • Aller T.A.
        • Wildsoet C.
        Bifocal soft contact lenses as a possible myopia control treatment: a case report involving identical twins.
        Clin. Exp. Optom. 2008; 914: 394-399
        • Anstice N.S.
        • Phillips J.R.
        Effect of dual-focus soft contact lens wear on axial myopia progression in children.
        Ophthalmology. 2011; 1186: 1152-1161
        • Sankaridurg Holden P.B.
        • Smith 3rd, E.
        • et al.
        Decrease in rate of myopia progression with a contact lens designed to reduce relative peripheral hyperopia: one-year results.
        Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011; 5213: 9362-9367
        • Lam C.S.
        • Tang W.C.
        • Tse D.Y.
        • et al.
        Defocus incorporated soft contact (DISC) lens slows myopia progression in Hong Kong Chinese schoolchildren: a 2-year randomised clinical trial.
        Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2014; 981: 40-45
        • Walline J.J.
        • McVey L.
        Myopia control with a soft bifocal contact lens.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2011; 883: 395-403
        • Montes-Mico R.
        • Madrid-Costa D.
        • Radhakrishnan H.
        • et al.
        Accommodative functions with multifocal contact lenses: a pilot study.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2011; 888: 998-1004
        • Kollbaum P.S.
        • Jansen M.E.
        • Tan J.
        • et al.
        Vision performance with a contact lens designed to slow myopia progression.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2013; 903: 205-214
        • Shah A.S.
        • Gundel R.
        Low-contrast visual acuity measurements in single-vision and bifocal soft lens wearers.
        Int. Contact Lens Clin. 2000; 274: 119-123
        • Fedtke C.
        • Ehrmann K.
        • Falk D.
        • et al.
        The BHVI-EyeMapper: peripheral refraction and aberration profiles.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2014; 91: 1199-1207
        • Dumbleton K.A.
        • Chalmers R.L.
        • McNally J.
        • et al.
        Effect of lens base curve on subjective comfort and assessment of fit with silicone hydrogel continuous wear contact lenses.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2002; 7910: 633-637
        • Roseman M.J.
        • Frost A.
        • Lawley M.E.
        Effects of base curve on the fit of thin, mid-water contact lenses.
        ICLC. 1993; 20: 95-100
        • Tomlinson A.
        • Bibby M.M.
        Movement and rotation of soft contact lenses. Effect of fit and lens design.
        Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 1980; 575: 275-279
        • Peyre C.
        • Fumery L.
        • Gatinel D.
        Comparison of high-order optical aberrations induced by different multifocal contact lens geometries.
        J. Fr. Ophtalmol. 2005; 286: 599-604
        • Patel S.
        • Fakhry M.
        • Alio J.L.
        Objective assessment of aberrations induced by multifocal contact lenses in vivo.
        CLAO J. 2002; 284: 196-201
        • Papas E.B.
        • Decenzo-Verbeten T.
        • Fonn D.
        • et al.
        Utility of short-term evaluation of presbyopic contact lens performance.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2009; 353: 144-148
        • Fernandes P.R.
        • Neves H.I.
        • Lopes-Ferreira D.P.
        • et al.
        Adaptation to multifocal and monovision contact lens correction.
        Optom. Vis. Sci. 2013; 903: 228-235