Zone of Clear Single Binocular Vision in Myopic Orthokeratology.
Journal
Eye & contact lens
ISSN: 1542-233X
Titre abrégé: Eye Contact Lens
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101160941
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
23
4
2019
medline:
2
1
2021
entrez:
23
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To examine the zone of clear single binocular vision (ZCSBV) in myopic children and young adults after 12 months of orthokeratology (OK) wear, in comparison with single-vision soft contact lens (SCL) wear. Twelve children (8-16 years) and 8 adults (18-29 years) were assessed with a series of near-point binocular vision tests when myopia was corrected using single-vision SCLs and again after 1 and 12 months of OK wear, and axial length was measured. The ZCSBV was constructed for baseline SCL wear and after 12 months of OK wear. After 1 month of OK wear, increased accommodative responses were noted in children (C) and adults (A) as increased binocular amplitude (C:P=0.03, A:P=0.04) and reduced accommodative lag (C:P=0.01, A:P=0.01). Divergence reserves improved after 1 month in both groups (P<0.04), and a near exophoric shift was evident at 12 months (C:P=0.01, A:P=0.04). All changes at 1 month maintained stability at 12 months. An increase in accommodation and vergence responses without reduction in range resulted in an expansion of the ZCSBV in both age groups. Axial length did not significantly change in either children (P=0.25) or adults (P=0.72). In both pediatric and young adult myopes, the ZCSBV expands toward a more divergent, increased accommodation response in OK compared with SCL wear. This occurs without a corresponding loss of convergence or accommodation deactivation, indicating improved depth of focus. These findings are relevant to visual acceptance and possible mechanisms of OK's efficacy for myopia control.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31008827
doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000614
pii: 00140068-202003000-00004
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
82-90Références
Sun Y, Xu F, Zhang T, et al. Orthokeratology to control myopia progression: A meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0124535.
Si JK, Tang K, Bi HS, et al. Orthokeratology for myopia control: A meta-analysis. Optom Vis Sci 2015;92:252–257.
Efron N, Morgan PB, Woods CA, et al. Survey of contact lens prescribing to infants, children, and teenagers. Optom Vis Sci 2011;88:461–468.
Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Peixoto-de-Matos SC, Faria-Ribeiro M, et al. Strategies to regulate myopia progression with contact lenses: A review. Eye Contact Lens 2016;42:24–34.
Tarrant J, Liu Y, Wildsoet CF. Orthokeratology can decrease the accommodative lag in myopes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2009;50:4294.
Zhu M, Feng H, Zhu J, et al. The impact of amplitude of accommodation on controlling the development of myopia in orthokeratology. Chin J Ophthalmol 2014;50:14–19.
Gwiazda JE, Hyman L, Norton TT, et al. Accommodation and related risk factors associated with myopia progression and their interaction with treatment in COMET children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:2143–2151.
Yang Z, Lan W, Ge J, et al. The effectiveness of progressive addition lenses on the progression of myopia in Chinese children. Ophthal Physiol Opt 2009;29:41–48.
Drobe B, de Saint-André R. The pre-myopic syndrome. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1995;15:375–378.
Bullimore MA, Gilmartin B, Royston JM. Steady-state accommodation and ocular biometry in late-onset myopia. Doc Ophthalmol 1992;80:143–155.
Evans BJW. Nature of Binocular Vision Anomalies. Pickwell's Binocular Vision Anomalies, 5th ed. Edinburgh, Scotland, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007, pp 2–11.
Quaid P, Simpson T. Association between reading speed, cycloplegic refractive error, and oculomotor function in reading disabled children versus controls. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2013;251:169–187.
Narayanasamy S, Vincent SJ, Sampson GP, et al. Impact of simulated hyperopia on academic-related performance in children. Optom Vis Sci 2015;92:227–236.
Bennett AG, Rabbetts RB. Clinical Visual Optics, 2nd ed. London, Boston, Butterworths, 1989, pp 529.
Hunt OA, Wolffsohn JS, García-Resúa C. Ocular motor triad with single vision contact lenses compared to spectacle lenses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2006;29:239–245.
Rueff EM, King-Smith PE, Bailey MD. Can binocular vision disorders contribute to contact lens discomfort? Optom Vis Sci 2015;92:e214–e221.
Felipe-Marquez G, Nombela-Palomo M, Cacho I, et al. Accommodative changes produced in response to overnight orthokeratology. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2015;253:619–626.
Felipe-Marquez G, Nombela-Palomo M, Palomo-Álvarez C, et al. Binocular function changes produced in response to overnight orthokeratology. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2017;255:179–188.
Kang P, Watt K, Chau T, et al. The impact of orthokeratology lens wear on binocular vision and accommodation: A short-term prospective study. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2018;41:501–506.
Han X, Xu D, Ge W, et al. A comparison of the effects of orthokeratology lens, medcall lens, and ordinary frame glasses on the accommodative response in myopic children. Eye Contact Lens 2018;44:268–271.
Gifford KL, Gifford P, Hendicott PL, et al. Binocular vision in orthokeratology contact lens wear for myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2017;58:2389. ARVO E-Abstract 2608249.
Gifford KL, Gifford P, Hendicott PL, et al. Near binocular visual function in young adult orthokeratology versus soft contact lens wearers. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2017;40:184–189.
Hofstetter H. Graphical analysis. In: Schor CM, Ciuffreda KJ, eds. Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects, Boston, MA, Butterworths Heinemann, 1983, pp 1439–1964.
Goss DA, Jackson TW. Clinical findings before the onset of myopia in youth: 2. Zone of clear single binocular vision. Optom Vis Sci 1996;73:263–268.
Gifford P, Gifford KL. The future of myopia control contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 2016;93:336–343.
Mountford J. Retention and regression of orthokeratology with time. Int Cont Lens Clin 1998;25:59–64.
Stillitano I, Schor P, Lipener C, et al. Long-term follow-up of orthokeratology corneal reshaping using wavefront aberrometry and contrast sensitivity. Eye Cont Lens 2008;34:140–145.
Gifford P, Li M, Lu H, et al. Corneal versus ocular aberrations after overnight orthokeratology. Optom Vis Sci 2013;90:439–447.
Mountford J. An analysis of the changes in corneal shape and refractive error induced by accelerated orthokeratology. Int Cont Lens Clin 1997;24:128–144.
Cho P, Cheung SW, Mountford J, et al. Good clinical practice in orthokeratology. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2008;31:17–28.
Wong EPF, Fricke TR, Dinardo C. Interexaminer repeatability of a new, modified prentice card compared with established phoria tests. Optom Vis Sci 2002;79:370–375.
Antona B, Barrio A, Barra F, et al. Repeatability and agreement in the measurement of horizontal fusional vergences. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2008;28:475–491.
Antona B, Sanchez I, Barrio A, et al. Intra-examiner repeatability and agreement in accommodative response measurements. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2009;29:606–614.
Queirós A, González-Méijome J, Jorge J. Influence of fogging lenses and cycloplegia on open-field automatic refraction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2008;28:387–392.
Chat SW, Edwards MH. Clinical evaluation of the Shin-Nippon SRW-5000 autorefractor in children. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2001;21:87–100.
Moore KE, Berntsen DA. Central and peripheral autorefraction repeatability in normal eyes. Optom Vis Sci 2014;91:1106–1112.
Chan B, Cho P, Cheung SW. Repeatability and agreement of two A-scan ultrasonic biometers and IOLMaster in non-orthokeratology subjects and post-orthokeratology children. Clin Exp Optom 2006;89:160–168.
Mountford J. Chapter 6—Trial Lens Fitting. Orthokeratology. London, United Kingdom, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2004, pp 139–173.
Lovie-Kitchin JE. Is it time to confine Snellen charts to the annals of history? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2015;35:631–636.
Ehrlich DL. Near vision stress: Vergence adaptation and accommodative fatigue. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1987;7:353–357.
Chen JC, Schmid KL, Brown B, et al. AC/A ratios in myopic and emmetropic Hong Kong children and the effect of timolol. Clin Exp Optom 2003;86:323–330.
Rainey BB, Goss DA, Kidwell M, et al. Reliability of the response AC/A ratio determined using nearpoint autorefraction and simultaneous heterophoria measurement. Clin Exp Optom 1998;81:185–192.
Evans BJW. Detecting binocular vision anomalies in primary eyecare practice. In: Pickwell's Binocular Vision Anomalies, 5th ed. Edinburgh, Scotland, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007, pp 12–38.
Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical Management of Binocular Vision: Heterophoric, Accommodative and Eye Movement Disorders, Philadephia, PA, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1994.
Armstrong RA. Statistical guidelines for the analysis of data obtained from one or both eyes. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2013;33:7–14.
Armstrong RA. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2014;34:502–508.
Anderson H, Stuebing KK, Fern KD, et al. Ten-year changes in fusional vergence, phoria, and nearpoint of convergence in myopic children. Optom Vis Sci 2011;88:1060–1065.
Anderson HA, Hentz G, Glasser A, et al. Minus-lens-stimulated accommodative amplitude decreases sigmoidally with age: A study of objectively measured accommodative amplitudes from age 3. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:2919–2926.
Cheung SW, Cho P. Subjective and objective assessments of the effect of orthokeratology—a cross-sectional study. Curr Eye Res 2004;28:121–127.
McLeod A, Potter J, Rah M. Comparison of autorefractions and keratometry readings with subjective refraction and corneal topograher following orthokeratology in children. Optom Vis Sci 2005;82:E-abstract 050045. Available at: https://www.aaopt.org/detail/knowledge-base-article/comparison-autorefractions-and-keratometry-readings-subjective-refraction-and-corneal-topograher, Accessed April 5, 2019.
Gwiazda J, Grice K, Held R, et al. Insufficient accommodation and near esophoria: Precursors or concomitants of juvenile-onset myopia? In: Tokoro T, ed. Tokyo, Japan, Myopia Updates Springer, 1998.
Abbott ML, Schmid KL, Strang NC. Differences in the accommodation stimulus response curves of adult myopes and emmetropes. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1998;18:13–20.
Bullimore MA, Reuter KS, Jones LA, et al. The study of progression of adult nearsightedness (SPAN): Design and baseline characteristics. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:594–604.
Donovan L, Sankaridurg P, Ho A, et al. Myopia progression rates in urban children wearing single-vision spectacles. Optom Vis Sci 2012;89:27–32.
Edwards MH, Li RW, Lam CS, et al. The Hong Kong progressive lens myopia control study: Study design and main findings. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:2852–2858.
Grosvenor T. A review and a suggested classification system for myopia on the basis of age-related prevalence and age of onset. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987;64:545–554.
Rosenfield M, Gilmartin B. Effect of target proximity on the open-loop accommodative response. Optom Vis Sci 1990;67:74–79.
Bullimore MA, Gilmartin B. Aspects of tonic accommodation in emmetropia and late-onset myopia. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987;64:499–503.
Allen PM, O'Leary DJ. Accommodation functions: Co-dependency and relationship to refractive error. Vis Res 2006;46:491–505.
McBrien NA, Millodot M. Differences in adaptation of tonic accommodation with refractive state. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1988;29:460–469.
Vera-Diaz FA, Strang NC, Winn B. Nearwork induced transient myopia during myopia progression. Curr Eye Res 2002;24:289–295.
Gwiazda J, Hyman L, Hussein M, et al. A randomized clinical trial of progressive addition lenses versus single vision lenses on the progression of myopia in children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1492–1500.
Gwiazda J, Grice K, Thorn F. Response AC/A ratios are elevated in myopic children. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1999;19:173–179.
Gwiazda J, Thorn F, Held R. Accommodation, accommodative convergence, and response AC/A ratios before and at the onset of myopia in children. Optom Vis Sci 2005;82:273–278.
Schor C. The influence of interactions between accommodation and convergence on the lag of accommodation. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1999;19:134–150.
Wagner S, Conrad F, Bakaraju RC, et al. Power profiles of single vision and multifocal soft contact lenses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2015;38:2–14.
Kho D, Fedtke C, Tilia D, et al. Effects of relative negative spherical aberration in single vision contact lens visual performance. Clin Optom (Auckl) 2018;10:9–17.
Hiraoka T, Matsumoto Y, Okamoto F, et al. Corneal higher-order aberrations induced by overnight orthokeratology. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;139:429–436.