Kate L Gifford, Katrina L Schmid, Josh M Collins, Clare B Maher, Riya Makan, Evonne Nguyen, Gemma B Parmenter, Bronte M Rolls, Xinyue S Zhang, David A Atchison
{"title":"多焦隐形眼镜的设计,而不是增加功率,影响年轻人近视的调节反应。","authors":"Kate L Gifford, Katrina L Schmid, Josh M Collins, Clare B Maher, Riya Makan, Evonne Nguyen, Gemma B Parmenter, Bronte M Rolls, Xinyue S Zhang, David A Atchison","doi":"10.1111/opo.12892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Prolonged nearwork has been implicated in myopia progression. Accommodation responses of young-adult myopes wearing different multifocal contact lenses were compared.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty adults, 18-25 years, with myopia (spherical equivalent refraction -0.50 to -5.50 D, mean -2.1 ± 1.6 D) wore five lens types in random order: Proclear single vision distance (SV), MiSight concentric dual-focus +2.00 D Add (MS), Biofinity aspheric centre distance +1.50 D Add (CD1) and +2.50 D Add (CD2) (all Coopervision), and NaturalVue aspheric (Visioneering Technologies) (NVue). Using a Grand-Seiko WAN-5500 autorefractor with binocular correction and viewing right eye accommodative responses were measured after a 10 min adaptation period at 4.0, 1.0, 0.5, 0.33 and 0.25 m distances. Dynamic measurements were taken for 4 s at 6 Hz. Accommodative stimuli and responses were referenced to 4 m (i.e., refraction differences between 4 m and nearer distances). Accommodation lags and refraction instabilities (standard deviations of dynamic responses) were determined. For comparison, results were obtained for an absolute presbyopic eye, where trial lenses counteracted the accommodation stimulus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For SV and MS, accommodation responses were similar to the stimulus values. For aspheric lenses CD1, CD2 and NVue, accommodation responses were approximately 1.0 D lower across the stimulus range than with SV and MS, and rates of change were approximately 0.84 D per 1 D stimulus change. MS produced greater refraction instabilities than other lenses. For the presbyope, changes in refraction matched the trial lenses, indicating that corrections due to measurement through the different lenses were not needed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reductions in accommodation response occurred in young myopes wearing aspheric multifocal contact lenses independent of the labelled 'add' power. The concentric dual-focus MS lens produced minimal lags but had greater instability than the other lenses. The results indicate that the mechanism of multifocal contact lenses slowing myopia progression is unlikely to be through relaxing accommodation, at least in young adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":520731,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)","volume":" ","pages":"1346-1354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multifocal contact lens design, not addition power, affects accommodation responses in young adult myopes.\",\"authors\":\"Kate L Gifford, Katrina L Schmid, Josh M Collins, Clare B Maher, Riya Makan, Evonne Nguyen, Gemma B Parmenter, Bronte M Rolls, Xinyue S Zhang, David A Atchison\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/opo.12892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Prolonged nearwork has been implicated in myopia progression. Accommodation responses of young-adult myopes wearing different multifocal contact lenses were compared.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty adults, 18-25 years, with myopia (spherical equivalent refraction -0.50 to -5.50 D, mean -2.1 ± 1.6 D) wore five lens types in random order: Proclear single vision distance (SV), MiSight concentric dual-focus +2.00 D Add (MS), Biofinity aspheric centre distance +1.50 D Add (CD1) and +2.50 D Add (CD2) (all Coopervision), and NaturalVue aspheric (Visioneering Technologies) (NVue). Using a Grand-Seiko WAN-5500 autorefractor with binocular correction and viewing right eye accommodative responses were measured after a 10 min adaptation period at 4.0, 1.0, 0.5, 0.33 and 0.25 m distances. Dynamic measurements were taken for 4 s at 6 Hz. Accommodative stimuli and responses were referenced to 4 m (i.e., refraction differences between 4 m and nearer distances). Accommodation lags and refraction instabilities (standard deviations of dynamic responses) were determined. For comparison, results were obtained for an absolute presbyopic eye, where trial lenses counteracted the accommodation stimulus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For SV and MS, accommodation responses were similar to the stimulus values. For aspheric lenses CD1, CD2 and NVue, accommodation responses were approximately 1.0 D lower across the stimulus range than with SV and MS, and rates of change were approximately 0.84 D per 1 D stimulus change. MS produced greater refraction instabilities than other lenses. For the presbyope, changes in refraction matched the trial lenses, indicating that corrections due to measurement through the different lenses were not needed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reductions in accommodation response occurred in young myopes wearing aspheric multifocal contact lenses independent of the labelled 'add' power. The concentric dual-focus MS lens produced minimal lags but had greater instability than the other lenses. The results indicate that the mechanism of multifocal contact lenses slowing myopia progression is unlikely to be through relaxing accommodation, at least in young adults.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520731,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1346-1354\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12892\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
摘要
目的:长时间近视眼与近视进展有关。比较不同多焦隐形眼镜配戴后青年近视患者的适应反应。方法:18-25岁近视成人20例(球面等效屈光度-0.50 ~ -5.50 D,平均-2.1±1.6 D),随机配戴Proclear单视距(SV)、MiSight同心双焦+2.00 D Add (MS)、Biofinity非球面中心距+1.50 D Add (CD1)和+2.50 D Add (CD2)(均为Coopervision)和NaturalVue非球面(Visioneering Technologies) (NVue) 5种类型的晶状体。使用带有双眼矫正的Grand-Seiko WAN-5500自折射镜,在4.0、1.0、0.5、0.33和0.25 m距离上观察10 min适应期后的右眼调节反应。在6 Hz下进行4 s的动态测量。适应性刺激和反应参照4米(即4米和更近距离之间的折射差)。调节滞后和折射不稳定性(动态响应的标准偏差)被确定。为了比较,获得了绝对老花眼的结果,其中试用镜片抵消了调节刺激。结果:对于SV和MS,调节反应与刺激值相似。对于非球面透镜CD1、CD2和NVue,在刺激范围内的调节响应比SV和MS低约1.0 D,每1 D刺激变化的变化率约为0.84 D。MS比其他透镜产生更大的折射不稳定性。对于老花眼,折射的变化与试验透镜相匹配,表明不需要通过不同透镜进行测量的校正。结论:年轻近视患者配戴非球面多焦隐形眼镜时,调节反应降低,与“add”度数无关。同心双焦MS透镜产生最小的滞后,但比其他透镜具有更大的不稳定性。结果表明,多焦点隐形眼镜减缓近视进展的机制不太可能是通过放松调节,至少在年轻人中是这样。
Multifocal contact lens design, not addition power, affects accommodation responses in young adult myopes.
Purpose: Prolonged nearwork has been implicated in myopia progression. Accommodation responses of young-adult myopes wearing different multifocal contact lenses were compared.
Methods: Twenty adults, 18-25 years, with myopia (spherical equivalent refraction -0.50 to -5.50 D, mean -2.1 ± 1.6 D) wore five lens types in random order: Proclear single vision distance (SV), MiSight concentric dual-focus +2.00 D Add (MS), Biofinity aspheric centre distance +1.50 D Add (CD1) and +2.50 D Add (CD2) (all Coopervision), and NaturalVue aspheric (Visioneering Technologies) (NVue). Using a Grand-Seiko WAN-5500 autorefractor with binocular correction and viewing right eye accommodative responses were measured after a 10 min adaptation period at 4.0, 1.0, 0.5, 0.33 and 0.25 m distances. Dynamic measurements were taken for 4 s at 6 Hz. Accommodative stimuli and responses were referenced to 4 m (i.e., refraction differences between 4 m and nearer distances). Accommodation lags and refraction instabilities (standard deviations of dynamic responses) were determined. For comparison, results were obtained for an absolute presbyopic eye, where trial lenses counteracted the accommodation stimulus.
Results: For SV and MS, accommodation responses were similar to the stimulus values. For aspheric lenses CD1, CD2 and NVue, accommodation responses were approximately 1.0 D lower across the stimulus range than with SV and MS, and rates of change were approximately 0.84 D per 1 D stimulus change. MS produced greater refraction instabilities than other lenses. For the presbyope, changes in refraction matched the trial lenses, indicating that corrections due to measurement through the different lenses were not needed.
Conclusion: Reductions in accommodation response occurred in young myopes wearing aspheric multifocal contact lenses independent of the labelled 'add' power. The concentric dual-focus MS lens produced minimal lags but had greater instability than the other lenses. The results indicate that the mechanism of multifocal contact lenses slowing myopia progression is unlikely to be through relaxing accommodation, at least in young adults.