Advertisement

Patient and parent perceptions of myopia modalities

Published:October 26, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2022.101772

      Abstract

      Purpose

      This study compared quality of life (QoL) of myopic adults and children who were established spectacle, soft contact lens (SCL), or orthokeratology (OK) wearers as well as parent/child responses using Pediatric Refractive Error Profile 2 (PREP2).

      Methods

      Forty-eight adults (aged 18–26 years), 49 children (aged 9–17 years), and the children’s parent, completed PREP2, with 7 subscales (symptoms, vision, activities, appearance, peer perception, handling, and overall). Adults and children must have worn their correction for at least three years. Parents were asked to answer how they thought their child would answer. Scores were compared between age groups, among correction groups, and between children and their parents using non-parametric ANOVA, Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank tests, as appropriate. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons among correction groups were conducted with Bonferroni adjustment.

      Results

      Average age of adults was 22 ± 2 and children was 14 ± 2 years, and duration of correction use was 8 ± 3 for adults and 5 ± 2 years for children (both p < 0.01). Adult OK wearers were more satisfied with vision (p = 0.04), activities (p < 0.001) and overall (p = 0.03) compared to spectacle wearers. Children OK wearers reported higher scores for activities than SCL (p = 0.048) and spectacle wearers (p < 0.001). Parents of contact lens wearers reported higher perceived QoL for activities (OK p < 0.001; SCL p = 0.02), handling (OK p = 0.02; SCL p < 0.001), appearance (SCL p = 0.001), and overall (OK p = 0.001; SCL p < 0.001) subscales than parents of child spectacle wearers.

      Conclusion

      Activity-driven children and adults perceive significant benefits from OK over spectacles. Parents’ perceptions did not align with their children’s perceptions of their correction.

      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

        • Bourne R.R.A.
        • Stevens G.A.
        • White R.A.
        • Smith J.L.
        • Flaxman S.R.
        • Price H.
        • et al.
        Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990–2010: A systematic analysis.
        Lancet Glob Heal. 2013; 1: e339-e349
        • Holden B.A.
        • Fricke T.R.
        • Wilson D.A.
        • Jong M.
        • Naidoo K.S.
        • Sankaridurg P.
        • et al.
        Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050.
        Ophthalmology. 2016; 123: 1036-1042
        • Efron N.
        • Morgan P.B.
        • Woods C.A.
        Survey of contact lens prescribing to infants, children, and teenagers.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2011; 88: 461-468https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e31820efa0f
        • Wildsoet C.F.
        • Chia A.
        • Cho P.
        • Guggenheim J.A.
        • Roelof J.
        • Read S.
        • et al.
        Progression Report.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2019; 60: M106-M131
        • Efron N.
        • Morgan P.B.
        • Woods C.A.
        • Santodomingo-Rubido J.
        • Nichols J.J.
        International survey of contact lens fitting for myopia control in children.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2020; 43: 4-8https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2019.06.008
        • Morgan P.B.
        • Efron N.
        • Woods C.A.
        • Santodomingo-Rubido J.
        Contact lens and anterior eye international survey of orthokeratology contact lens fitting.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2019; 42: 450-454
        • Walline J.J.
        • Gaume A.
        • Jones L.A.
        • Rah M.J.
        • Manny R.E.
        • Berntsen D.A.
        • et al.
        Benefits of contact lens wear for children and teens.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2007; 33: 317-321
        • Paquette L.
        • Jones D.A.
        • Sears M.
        • Nandakumar K.
        • Woods C.A.
        Contact lens fitting and training in a child and youth population.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2015; 38: 419-423https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2015.05.002
        • Pomeda A.R.
        • Pérez-Sánchez B.
        • Cañadas Suárez M.D.P.
        • Prieto Garrido F.L.
        • Gutiérrez-Ortega R.
        • Villa-Collar C.
        MiSight assessment study spain: a comparison of vision-related quality-of-life measures between MiSight contact lenses and single-vision spectacles.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2018; 44: S99-S104
        • Chalmers R.L.
        • Wagner H.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        • Lam D.Y.
        • Kinoshita B.T.
        • Jansen M.E.
        • et al.
        Age and other risk factors for corneal infiltrative and inflammatory events in young soft contact lens wearers from the Contact Lens Assessment in Youth (CLAY) study.
        Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011; 52: 6690
        • Bullimore M.A.
        • Ritchey E.R.
        • Shah S.
        • Leveziel N.
        • Bourne R.R.A.
        • Flitcroft D.I.
        The risks and benefits of myopia control.
        Ophthalmology. 2021; 128: 1561-1579https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.04.032
        • Bullimore M.A.
        The safety of soft contact lenses in children.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2017; 94: 638-646https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000001078
        • Wagner H.
        • Richdale K.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        • Lam D.Y.
        • Jansen M.E.
        • Kinoshita B.T.
        • et al.
        Age, behavior, environment, and health factors in the soft contact lens risk survey.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2014; 91: 252-261
        • Bullimore M.A.
        • Sinnott L.T.
        • Jones-Jordan L.A.
        The risk of microbial keratitis with overnight corneal reshaping lenses.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2013; 90: 937-944https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e31829cac92
        • Bullimore M.A.
        • Mirsayafov D.S.
        • Khurai A.R.
        • Kononov L.B.
        • Asatrian S.P.
        • Shmakov A.N.
        • et al.
        Pediatric microbial keratitis with overnight orthokeratology in Russia.
        Eye Contact Lens Sci Clin Pract. 2021; 47: 420-425
        • Walline J.J.
        • Long S.
        • Zadnik K.
        Daily disposable contact lens wear in myopic children.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2004; 81: 255-259https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-200404000-00011
        • Walline J.J.
        • Jones L.A.
        • Rah M.J.
        • Manny R.E.
        • Berntsen D.A.
        • Chitkara MONICA
        • et al.
        Contact lenses in pediatrics (CLIP) study: chair time and ocular health.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2007; 84: 896-902
        • Metelko Z.
        • Szabo S.
        • Diseases M.
        • Kumar S.
        • Delhi N.
        • Heck V.
        • et al.
        The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization.
        Soc Sci Med. 1995; 41: 1403-1409https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-K
      1. Food and Drug Adminstration. Contact Lenses, https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/consumer-products/contact-lenses; 2019 [accessed 03 March 2020].

        • Gordon L.E.
        Compliance.
        Compliance Cmaj. 2014; 186: 534-535
        • McAlinden C.
        The importance of doctor–patient communication.
        Br J Hosp Med. 2014; 75: 64-65
        • Sankaridurg P.
        • Tahhan N.
        • Kandel H.
        • Naduvilath T.
        • Zou H.
        • Frick K.D.
        • et al.
        International Myopia Institute: impact of myopia.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2021; : 62https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.62.5.2
        • Terry R.L.
        Eyeglasses and gender stereotypes.
        Optom Vis Sci. 1989; 66: 694-697
        • Terry R.L.
        • Berg A.J.
        • Phillips P.E.
        The effect of eyeglasses on self-esteem.
        J Am Optom Assoc. 1983; 54: 947-949
        • Kodjebacheva G.D.
        • Maliski S.
        • Coleman A.L.
        Use of eyeglasses among children in elementary school: perceptions, behaviors, and interventions discussed by parents, school nurses, and teachers during focus groups.
        Am J Heal Promot. 2015; 29: 324-331https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.120315-QUAL-140
        • Walline J.J.
        • Sinnott L.
        • Johnson E.D.
        • Ticak A.
        • Jones S.L.
        • Jones L.A.
        What do kids think about kids in eyeglasses?.
        Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2008; 28: 218-224https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00559.x
        • Berntsen D.A.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        • Barr J.T.
        The effect of overnight contact lens corneal reshaping on refractive error-specific quality of life.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2006; 83: 354-359https://doi.org/10.1097/01.opx.0000221401.33776.54
        • Hiraoka T.
        • Okamoto C.
        • Ishii Y.
        • Kakita T.
        • Okamoto F.
        • Takahashi H.
        • et al.
        Patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes after overnight orthokeratology.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2009; 86: 875-882https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181ae34d5
        • Lipson M.J.
        • Sugar A.
        • Musch D.C.
        Overnight corneal reshaping versus soft disposable contact lenses: Vision-related quality-of-life differences from a randomized clinical trial.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2005; 82: 886-891https://doi.org/10.1097/01.opx.0000180818.40127.dc
        • Ritchey E.R.
        • Barr J.T.
        • Mitchell G.L.
        The comparison of overnight lens modalities (COLM) study.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2005; 31: 70-75https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000146323.18919.13
        • Rah M.J.
        • Walline J.J.
        • Jones-Jordan L.A.
        • Sinnott L.T.
        • Jackson J.M.
        • Manny R.E.
        • et al.
        Vision specific quality of life of pediatric contact lens wearers.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2010; 87: 560-566
        • Plowright A.J.
        • Maldonado-Codina C.
        • Howarth G.F.
        • Kern J.
        • Morgan P.B.
        Daily disposable contact lenses versus spectacles in teenagers.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2015; 92: 44-52https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000454
        • Li L.
        • Moody K.
        • Tan D.T.H.
        • Yew K.C.
        • Ming P.Y.
        • Long Q.B.
        Contact lenses in pediatrics study in Singapore.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2009; 35: 188-195https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0b013e3181abb5bb
        • Santodomingo-Rubido J.
        • Villa-Collar C.
        • Gilmartin B.
        • Gutiérrez-Ortega R.
        Myopia control with orthokeratology contact lenses in Spain: a comparison of vision-related quality-of-life measures between orthokeratology contact lenses and single-vision spectacles.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2013; 39: 153-157https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0b013e31827a0241
        • Zhao F.
        • Zhao G.
        • Zhao Z.
        Investigation of the effect of orthokeratology lenses on quality of life and behaviors of children.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2018; 44: 335-338https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000529
        • Tadić V.
        • Cumberland P.M.
        • Lewando-Hundt G.
        • Rahi J.S.
        Do visually impaired children and their parents agree on the child’s vision-related quality of life and functional vision?.
        Br J Ophthalmol. 2017; 101: 244-250https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-308582
        • Anderson C.E.
        Validation and repeatability of pediatric refractive error profile 2 (PREP2).
        ([Master's thesis]) Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio2013
        • Walline J.J.
        • Bailey M.D.
        • Zadnik K.
        Vision-specific quality of life and modes of refractive error correction.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2000; 77: 648-652https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-200012000-00011
        • Queirós A.
        • Villa-Collar C.
        • Gutiérrez A.R.
        • Jorge J.
        • González-Méijome J.M.
        Quality of life of myopic subjects with different methods of visual correction using the NEI RQL-42 questionnaire.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2012; 38: 116-121https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0b013e3182480e97
        • McAlinden C.
        • Lipson M.
        Orthokeratology and contact lens quality of life questionnaire (OCL-QoL).
        Eye Contact Lens. 2018; 44: 279-285https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000451
        • Faul F.
        • Erdfelder E.
        • Lang A.-G.
        • Buchner A.
        G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.
        Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39: 175-191https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
        • Anderson C.E.
        Validation of the pediatric refractive error profile 2.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2012; (E-abstract:125546)
        • Maldonado-Codina C.
        • Navascues-Cornago M.
        • Plowright A.J.
        • Mirza A.
        • Smith S.
        • Read M.L.
        • et al.
        Using face masks with spectacles versus contact lenses.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2022; 45: 101516
        • Gregory H.R.
        • Nti A.N.
        • Wolffsohn J.S.
        • Berntsen D.A.
        • Ritchey E.R.
        Visual performance of center-distance multifocal contact lenses fit using a myopia control paradigm.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2021; 98: 272-279https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000001665