66 resultados para Spectacle Lenses
Resumo:
Purpose: Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) is a successful tear film stabiliser and is widely used in comfort drops and some soft contact lens materials. A PVA-containing lens, nelfilcon A has been modified to include additional (non-functional) PVA in order to provide improved comfort. This study aims to examine the clinical performance of this nelfilcon A lens with AquaRelease™ (AquaRelease). Methods: Two contralateral, investigator masked, open label, subjective and objective evaluations were conducted. The first examined the effect of adding increased molecular weight PVA to nelfilcon A (n = 5), and the second compared this AquaRelease lens to ocufilcon B (n = 34). The principal measures were non-invasive break-up time (NIBUT) and subjective comfort, which were assessed at the beginning and end of a week of daily wear, and three times throughout 1 day at 8, 12 and 16 h. Results: All subjects successfully completed the daily wearing schedule of 16 h. On initial insertion, subjective comfort and NIBUT improved for AquaRelease than original nelfilcon A lenses (p < 0.05). Initial comfort was better for AquaRelease compared to ocufilcon B lenses (p = 0.01); however, NIBUT was not statistically different (11.7 ± 15.6 s versus 8.4 ± 6.8 s; p = 0.26). Subjective comfort decreased with time (p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference between AquaRelease and ocufilcon B lenses (p = 0.16). NIBUT was not significantly affected by time (p = 0.56) or between lenses (p = 0.33). At the end of a weeks' wear, subjective initial, end-of-day, overall comfort and vision were rated significantly better with AquaRelease than ocufilcon B (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Release of additional non-functionalised PVA from the nelfilcon A lenses appears to enhance comfortable contact lens wear. © 2006 British Contact Lens Association.
Resumo:
Purpose. This study reports data from an 18-month longitudinal study of neophyte contact lens wearers and compares changes in ocular refraction and biometry induced by daily wear and continuous wear of two different silicone hydrogel (SiH) materials. Methods. Forty-five subjects were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to wear one of the two silicone hydrogel materials: Lotrafilcon A or Balafilcon A lenses on either a daily or continuous wear basis. Measurements of objective refraction, axial length, anterior chamber depth, corneal curvature, and the rate of peripheral corneal flattening were performed before and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after initial fitting. Results. Mean spherical equivalent refractive error increased in the myopic direction in all contact lens groups across time (p < 0.001). Axial length was the main biometric contributor to the development of myopia. After 18 months of lens wear, subjects in the Lotrafilcon A group showed the greater mean increase in myopia (i.e., -0.50 D). Conclusions. The results of this study show that increases in myopia, similar if not higher than those found to occur normally in young adult noncontact lens wearers, still occur with silicone hydrogel contact lens wear. The main biometric contributor to the progression of myopia was an increase in axial length. Differences between our results and those of previous studies with silicone hydrogel contact lenses could be attributed to the differing populations used in which both age and occupation may have played a role. Copyright © 2005 American Academy of Optometry.
Surface roughness after excimer laser ablation using a PMMA model:profilometry and effects on vision
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To show that the limited quality of surfaces produced by one model of excimer laser systems can degrade visual performance with a polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) model. METHODS: A range of lenses of different powers was ablated in PMMA sheets using five DOS-based Nidek EC-5000 laser systems (Nidek Technologies, Gamagori, Japan) from different clinics. Surface quality was objectively assessed using profilometry. Contrast sensitivity and visual acuity were measured through the lenses when their powers were neutralized with suitable spectacle trial lenses. RESULTS: Average surface roughness was found to increase with lens power, roughness values being higher for negative lenses than for positive lenses. Losses in visual contrast sensitivity and acuity measured in two subjects were found to follow a similar pattern. Findings are similar to those previously published with other excimer laser systems. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of surface roughness produced by some laser systems may be sufficient to degrade visual performance under some circumstances.
Resumo:
Background: Optometric practices offer contact lenses as cash sale items or as part of monthly payment plans. With the contact lens market becoming increasingly competitive, patients are opting to purchase lenses from supermarkets and Internet suppliers. Monthly payment plans are often implemented to improve loyalty. This study aimed to compare behavioural loyalty between monthly payment plan members and non-members. Methods: BBR Optometry Ltd offers a monthly payment plan (Eyelife™) to their contact lens wearers. A retrospective audit of 38 Eyelife™ members (mean. ±. SD: 42.7. ±. 15.0 years) and 30 non-members (mean. ±. SD: 40.8. ±. 16.7 years) was conducted. Revenue and profits generated, service uptake and product sales between the two groups were compared over a fixed period of 18 months. Results: Eyelife™ members generated significantly higher professional fee revenue ( P<. 0.001), £153.96 compared to £83.50, and profits ( P<. 0.001). Eyelife™ members had a higher uptake of eye examinations ( P<. 0.001). The 2 groups demonstrated no significant difference in spectacle sales by volume ( P= 0.790) or value ( P= 0.369). There were also no significant differences in contact lens revenue ( P= 0.337), although Eyelife™ members did receive a discount. The Eyelife™ group incurred higher contact lens costs ( P= 0.037), due to a greater volume of contact lens purchases, 986 units compared to 582. Conclusions: Monthly payment plans improve loyalty among contact lens wearers, particularly service uptake and volume of lens purchases. Additionally the greater professional fees generated, render monthly payment plans an attractive business model and practice builder.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate and compare the functional and perceived benefits of wearing coloured lenses by patients with age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). Method: Ten subjects with early ARMD and five elderly controls wore a selection of NoIR wrap-around coloured lenses (yellow 29.7% light transmission, orange 22.9%, red 16.8% and grey 10.3%), each for a duration of 7 days. Contrast sensitivity, colour vision, visual acuity, the effect of glare and peripheral sensitivity were measured for each lens and compared with a control (no lens) condition. Subjective ratings of visual performance were also scored. Results: Compared with the no filter condition, red and grey lenses reduced contrast sensitivity whereas yellow and orange lenses increased contrast sensitivity. These objective changes were supported by subjective ratings in subjects with ARMD. Grey lenses reduced the loss of contrast sensitivity usually suffered in the presence of glare, whereas visual acuity and peripheral sensitivity decreased with red lenses. Colour vision became distorted with red lenses in control subjects, but was relatively unaffected by the use of coloured lenses in subjects with ARMD. Conclusions: The subjective benefit of coloured lenses appears to be due to a minor enhancement of contrast sensitivity. © 2002 The College of Optometrists.
Resumo:
This paper focuses on the effects of wear regime on the deposition pattern of important immunoregulatory proteins on FDA Group IV etafilcon-A lenses. Specifically, the aim was to assess the extent to which the daily disposable wear modality produces a different deposition of proteins from the conventional daily wear regime which is coupled with cleaning and disinfection. Counter immunoelectrophoresis (CIE) was employed to detect individual proteins in lens extracts from individual patients and focused on the analysis of five proteins, IgA, IgG, lactoferrin, albumin and kininogen. Deposition was monitored as a function of time; significantly lower deposition was detected on the daily disposable lenses. cr 2002 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate lenses produced by excimer laser ablation of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) plates. Setting: University research laboratory. Methods: Two Nidek EC-5000 scanning-slit excimer laser systems were used to ablate plane-parallel plates of PMMA. The ablated lenses were examined by focimetry, interferometry, and mechanical surface profiling. Results: The spherical optical powers of the lenses matched the expected values, but the cylindrical powers were generally lower than intended. Interferometry revealed marked irregularity in the surface of negative corrections, which often had a positive “island” at their center. Positive corrections were generally smoother. These findings were supported by the results of mechanical profiling. Contrast sensitivity measurements carried out when observing through ablated lenses whose power had been neutralized with a suitable spectacle lens of opposite sign confirmed that the surface irregularities of the ablated lenses markedly reduced contrast sensitivity over a range of spatial frequencies. Conclusion: Improvements in beam delivery systems seem desirable.
Resumo:
As we settle into a new year, this second issue of Contact Lens and Anterior Eye allows us to reflect on how new research in this field impacts our understanding, but more importantly, how we use this evidence basis to enhance our day to day practice, to educate the next generation of students and to construct the research studies to deepen our knowledge still further. The end of 2014 saw the publication of the UK governments Research Exercise Framework (REF) which ranks Universities in terms of their outputs (which includes their paper, publications and research income), environment (infrastructure and staff support) and for the first time impact (defined as “any effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia” [8]). The REF is a process of expert review, carried out in 36 subject-based units of assessment, of which our field is typically submitted to the Allied Health, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy panel. Universities that offer Optometry did very well with Cardiff, Manchester and Aston in the top 10% out of the 94 Universities that submitted to this panel (Grade point Average ranked order). While the format of the new exercise (probably in 2010) to allocate the more than £2 billion of UK government research funds is yet to be determined, it is already rumoured that impact will contribute an even larger proportion to the weighting. Hence it is even more important to reflect on the impact of our research. In this issue, Elisseef and colleagues [5] examine the intriguing potential of modifying a lens surface to allow it to bind to known wetting agents (in this case hyaluronic acid) to enhance water retention. Such a technique has the capacity to reduced friction between the lens surface and the eyelids/ocular surface, presumably leading to higher comfort and less reason for patients to discontinue with lens wear. Several papers in this issue report on the validity of new high precision, fast scanning imaging and quantification equipment, utilising techniques such as Scheimpflug, partial coherence interferometry, aberrometry and video allowing detailed assessment of anterior chamber biometry, corneal topography, corneal biomechanics, peripheral refraction, ocular aberrations and lens fit. The challenge is how to use this advanced instrumentation which is becoming increasingly available to create real impact. Many challenges in contact lenses and the anterior eye still prevail in 2015 such as: -While contact lens and refractive surgery complications are relatively rare, they are still too often devastating to the individual and their quality of life (such as the impact and prognosis of patients with Acanthmoeba Keratitis reported by Jhanji and colleagues in this issue [7]). How can we detect those patients who are going to be affected and what modifications do we need to make to contact lenses and patient management prevent this occurring? -Drop out from contact lenses still occurs at a rapid rate and symptoms of dry eye seem to be the leading cause driving this discontinuation of wear [1] and [2]. What design, coating, material and lubricant release mechanism will make a step change in end of day comfort in particular? -Presbyopia is a major challenge to hassle free quality vision and is one of the first signs of ageing noticed by many people. As an emmetrope approaching presbyopia, I have a vested interest in new medical devices that will give me high quality vision at all distances when my arms won’t stretch any further. Perhaps a new definition of presbyopia could be when you start to orientate your smartphone in the landscape direction to gain the small increase in print size needed to read! Effective accommodating intraocular lenses that truly mimic the pre-presbyopic crystalline lenses are still a way off [3] and hence simultaneous images achieved through contact lenses, intraocular lenses or refractive surgery still have a secure future. However, splitting light reaching the retina and requiring the brain to supress blurred images will always be a compromise on contrast sensitivity and is liable to cause dysphotopsia; so how will new designs account for differences in a patient's task demands and own optical aberrations to allow focused patient selection, optimising satisfaction? -Drug delivery from contact lenses offers much in terms of compliance and quality of life for patients with chronic ocular conditions such as glaucoma, dry eye and perhaps in the future, dry age-related macular degeneration; but scientific proof-of-concept publications (see EIShaer et al. [6]) have not yet led to commercial products. Part of this is presumably the regulatory complexity of combining a medical device (the contact lens) and a pharmaceutical agent. Will 2015 be the year when this innovation finally becomes a reality for patients, bringing them an enhanced quality of life through their eye care practitioners and allowing researchers to further validate the use of pharmaceutical contact lenses and propose enhancements as the technology matures? -Last, but no means least is the field of myopia control, the topic of the first day of the BCLA's Conference in Liverpool, June 6–9th 2015. The epidemic of myopia is a blight, particularly in Asia, with significant concerns over sight threatening pathology resulting from the elongated eye. This is a field where real impact is already being realised through new soft contact lens optics, orthokeratology and low dose pharmaceuticals [4], but we still need to be able to better predict which technique will work best for an individual and to develop new techniques to retard myopia progression in those who don’t respond to current treatments, without increasing their risk of complications or the treatment impacting their quality of life So what will your New Year's resolution be to make 2015 a year of real impact, whether by advancing science or applying the findings published in journals such as Contact Lens and Anterior Eye to make a real difference to your patients’ lives?
Resumo:
Purpose: To compare lens orientation and rotational recovery of five currently available soft toric lenses. Methods: Twenty subjects were recruited and trialed with each of the study lenses in a random order. Study lenses were PureVision® Toric (B&L), Air Optix® for Astigmatism (Alcon), Biofinity® Toric (CooperVision), Acuvue® Advance for Astigmatism (Vistakon), and Proclear® Toric (CooperVision). Lens orientation in primary position to determine the lens rotation form the vertical position and rotational recovery to primary gaze orientation following a 45° manual misorientation for the different lenses was compared. Results: The Biofinity Toric showed the lowest rotation from the vertical position and the Proclear Toric the highest. Also, the highest and the lowest reorientation speed were related to the Biofinity Toric and the Acuvue Advance for Astigmatism, respectively. The Repeated Measures ANOVA showed a significant difference in the lens rotation (P=. 0.004) and rotational recovery (P<. 0.001) among different contact lenses and the performed multiple comparisons indicated differences in rotation and also in reorientation speed were only seen between the Biofinity Toric when compared to four other lenses (P<. 0.05). Conclusion: Although there was appropriate fitting, based upon lens orientation and reorientation speed, with each of the study lenses it would appear that the optimized ballast technique used in the design of the Biofinity Toric helps reduce lens rotation and improve rotational recovery compared to others.
Resumo:
Pseudophakic patients are frequently encountered in optometric practice, often the result of cataract extraction but also presbyopia correction. Given advances in technology and surgery, the demand for intraocular lenses for correcting a variety of refractive requirements has increased owing to an ageing population. Based on the patient’s needs, either fixed focus, toric, accommodating or multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) may be implanted. During optometric examination, attention should be drawn to a history of IOLs and the potential complications they may cause in order to manage them effectively, particularly where sight is threatened. Although objective and subjective refraction does not differ greatly between phakic and pseudophakic patients, care should be taken to set the patient up correctly and the reflex during retinoscopy observed for posterior sub-capsular opacification. Additional tests such as reading speed, and glare and contrast sensitivity are necessary to determine the outcome of IOL surgery and detect potential problems associated with multifocal and accommodating IOLs. Based upon the results of these tests, refraction, and type of IOL, contact lens or spectacle correction may be required to meet the visual demands of the patient.
Resumo:
Presbyopia is a consequence of ageing and is therefore increasing inprevalence due to an increase in the ageing population. Of the many methods available to manage presbyopia, the use of contact lenses is indeed a tried and tested reversible option for those wishing to be spectacle free. Contact lens options to correct presbyopia include multifocal contact lenses and monovision.Several options have been available for many years with available guides to help choose multifocal contact lenses. However there is no comprehensive way to help the practitioner selecting the best option for an individual. An examination of the simplest way of predicting the most suitable multifocal lens for a patient will only enhance and add to the current evidence available. The purpose of the study was to determine the current use of presbyopic correction modalities in an optometric practice population in the UK and to evaluate and compare the optical performance of four silicone hydrogel soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal performance with contact lens monovision. The presbyopic practice cohort principal forms of refractive correction were distance spectacles (with near and intermediate vision providedby a variety of other forms of correction), varifocal spectacles and unaided distance with reading spectacles, with few patients wearing contact lenses as their primary correction modality. The results of the multifocal contact lens randomised controlled trial showed that there were only minor differences in corneal physiology between the lens options. Visual acuity differences were observed for distance targets, but only for low contrast letters and under mesopic lighting conditions. At closer distances between 20cm and 67cm, the defocus curves demonstrated that there were significant differences in acuity between lens designs (p < 0.001) and there was an interaction between the lens design and the level of defocus (p < 0.001). None of the lenses showed a clear near addition, perhaps due to their more aspheric rather than zoned design. As expected, stereoacuity was reduced with monovision compared with the multifocal contact lens designs, although there were some differences between the multifocal lens designs (p < 0.05). Reading speed did not differ between lens designs (F = 1.082, p = 0.368), whereas there was a significant difference in critical print size (F = 7.543, p < 0.001). Glare was quantified with a novel halometer and halo size was found to significantly differ between lenses(F = 4.101, p = 0.004). The rating of iPhone image clarity was significantly different between presbyopic corrections (p = 0.002) as was the Near Acuity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) rating of near performance (F = 3.730, p = 0.007).The pupil size did not alter with contact lens design (F = 1.614, p = 0.175), but was larger in the dominant eye (F = 5.489, p = 0.025). Pupil decentration relative to the optical axis did not alter with contact lens design (F = 0.777, p =0.542), but was also greater in the dominant eye (F = 9.917, p = 0.003). It was interesting to note that there was no difference in spherical aberrations induced between the contact lens designs (p > 0.05), with eye dominance (p > 0.05) oroptical component (ocular, corneal or internal: p > 0.05). In terms of subjective patient lens preference, 10 patients preferred monovision,12 Biofinity multifocal lens, 7 Purevision 2 for Presbyopia, 4 AirOptix multifocal and 2 Oasys multifocal contact lenses. However, there were no differences in demographic factors relating to lifestyle or personality, or physiological characteristics such as pupil size or ocular aberrations as measured at baseline,which would allow a practitioner to identify which lens modality the patient would prefer. In terms of the performance of patients with their preferred lens, it emerged that Biofinity multifocal lens preferring patients had a better high contrast acuity under photopic conditions, maintained their reading speed at smaller print sizes and subjectively rated iPhone clarity as better with this lens compared with the other lens designs trialled. Patients who preferred monovision had a lower acuity across a range of distances and a larger area of glare than those patients preferring other lens designs that was unexplained by the clinical metrics measured. However, it seemed that a complex interaction of aberrations may drive lens preference. New clinical tests or more diverse lens designs which may allow practitioners to prescribe patients the presbyopic contact lens option that will work best for them first time remains a hope for the future.
Resumo:
In the past 30 years, organized crime (OC) has shifted from being an issue of little, or no concern, to being considered one of the key security threats facing the European Union (EU), the economic and political fabric of its society and its citizens. The purpose of this article is to understand how OC has come to be understood as one of the major security threats in the EU, by applying different lenses of Securitization Theory (ST). More specifically, the research question guiding this article is whether applying different ST approaches can lead us to draw differing conclusions as to whether OC has been successfully securitized in the EU. Building on the recent literature that argues that this theoretical framework has branched out into different approaches, this article wishes to contrast two alternative views of how a security problem comes into being, in order to verify whether different approaches can lead to diverging conclusions regarding the same phenomenon. The purpose of this exercise is to contribute to the further development of ST by pointing out that the choice in approach bears direct consequences on reaching a conclusion regarding the successful character of a securitization process. Starting from a reflection on ST, the article proceeds with applying a “linguistic approach” to the case study, which it then contrasts with a “sociological approach”. The article proposes that although the application of a “linguistic approach” seems to indicate that OC has become securitized in the EU, it also overlooks a number of elements, which the “sociological approach” renders visible and which lead us to refute the initial conclusion.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To assess the performance of four commercially available silicone hydrogel multifocal monthly contact lens designs against monovision. METHODS: A double-masked randomized crossover trial of Air Optix Aqua multifocal, PureVision 2 for Presbyopia, Acuvue OASYS for Presbyopia, Biofinity multifocal, and monovision with Biofinity contact lenses was conducted on 35 presbyopes (54.3 ± 6.2 years). After 4 weeks of wear, visual performance was quantified by high- and low-contrast visual acuity under photopic and mesopic conditions, reading speed, defocus curves, stereopsis, halometry, aberrometry, Near Activity Visual Questionnaire rating, and subjective quality of vision scoring. Bulbar, limbal, and palpebral hyperemia and corneal staining were graded to monitor the impact of each contact lens on ocular physiology. RESULTS: High-contrast photopic visual acuity (p = 0.102), reading speed (F = 1.082, p = 0.368), and aberrometry (F = 0.855, p = 0.493) were not significantly different between presbyopic lens options. Defocus curve profiles (p <0.001), stereopsis (p <0.001), halometry (F = 4.101, p = 0.004), Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (F = 3.730, p = 0.007), quality of vision (p = 0.002), bulbar hyperemia (p = 0.020), and palpebral hyperemia (p = 0.012) differed significantly between lens types, with the Biofinity multifocal lens design principal (center-distance lens was fitted to the dominant eye and a center-near lens to the nondominant eye) typically outperforming the other lenses. CONCLUSIONS: Although ocular aberration variation between individuals largely masks the differences in optics between current multifocal contact lens designs, certain design strategies can outperform monovision, even in early presbyopes.
Resumo:
A number of clinical techniques are available to assess the visual and optical performance of the eye. This report aims to review the advantages and limitations of techniques used in previous studies of patients implanted with intraocular lenses (IOLs), whose designs are ever increasing in optical complexity. Although useful, in-vitro measurements of IOL optical quality cannot account for the wide range of biological variation in ocular anatomy and corneal optics, which will impact on the visual outcome achieved. This further highlights the need for a standardised series of visual performance tests that can be applied to a wide range of IOL designs. The conclusions of this report intend to assistresearchers in developing a comprehensive series of investigations to evaluate IOL performance. Repeatable and reproducible in-vivo assessments of visual and optical performance are desirable to further develop IOL concepts and designs, in the hope of improving current postoperative visual satisfaction. © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To assess the surface tear breakup time and clinical performance of three daily disposable silicone hydrogel contact lenses over 16 hours of wear. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients (mean [±SD] age, 22.1 [±3.5] years) bilaterally wore (narafilcon A, filcon II-3, and delefilcon A) contact lenses in a prospective, randomized, masked, 1-week crossover clinical trial. Tear film was assessed by the tear meniscus height (TMH), ocular/contact lens surface temperature dynamics, and lens surface noninvasive breakup time at 8, 12, and 16 hours of wear. Clinical performance and ocular physiology were assessed by subjective questionnaire, by high-/low-contrast logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) acuity, and through bulbar and limbal hyperemia grading. Corneal and conjunctival staining were assessed after lens removal. RESULTS: Delefilcon A demonstrated a longer noninvasive breakup time (13.4 [±4.4] seconds) than filcon II-3 (11.6 [±3.7] seconds; p < 0.001) and narafilcon A (12.3 [±3.7] seconds; p < 0.001). A greater TMH (0.35 [±0.11] mm) was shown by delefilcon A than filcon II-3 (0.32 [±0.10] seconds; p = 0.016). Delefilcon A showed less corneal staining after 16 hours of lens wear (0.7 [±0.6] Efron grade) than filcon II-3 (1.1 [±0.7]; p < 0.001) and narafilcon A (0.9 [±0.7]; p = 0.031). Time was not a significant factor for prelens tear film stability (F = 0.594, p = 0.555) or TMH (F = 0.632, p = 0.534). Lens brand did not affect temperature (F = 1.220, p = 0.308), but it decreased toward the end of the day (F = 19.497, p < 0.001). Comfort, quality of vision, visual acuity and contrast acuity, and limbal grading were similar between the lens brands but decreased with time during the day (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The tear breakup time over the contact lens surface differed between lens types and may have a role in protecting the ocular surface.