Accommodating intraocular lenses:a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods

The correction of presbyopia and restoration of true accommodative function to the ageing eye is the focus of much ongoing research and clinical work. A range of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs) implanted during cataract surgery has been developed and they are designed to change either their position or shape in response to ciliary muscle contraction to generate an increase in dioptric power. Two main design concepts exist. First, axial shift concepts rely on anterior axial movement of one or two optics creating accommodative ability. Second, curvature change designs are designed to provide significant amplitudes of accommodation with little physical displacement. Single-optic devices have been used most widely, although the true accommodative ability provided by forward shift of the optic appears limited and recent findings indicate that alternative factors such as flexing of the optic to alter ocular aberrations may be responsible for the enhanced near vision reported in published studies. Techniques for analysing the performance of AIOLs have not been standardised and clinical studies have reported findings using a wide range of both subjective and objective methods, making it difficult to gauge the success of these implants. There is a need for longitudinal studies using objective methods to assess long-term performance of AIOLs and to determine if true accommodation is restored by the designs available. While dual-optic and curvature change IOLs are designed to provide greater amplitudes of accommodation than is possible with single-optic devices, several of these implants are in the early stages of development and require significant further work before human use is possible. A number of challenges remain and must be addressed before the ultimate goal of restoring youthful levels of accommodation to the presbyopic eye can be achieved.

Modelling the human accommodation system using finite element analysis

The human accommodation system has been extensively examined for over a century, with a particular focus on trying to understand the mechanisms that lead to the loss of accommodative ability with age (Presbyopia). The accommodative process, along with the potential causes of presbyopia, are disputed; hindering efforts to develop methods of restoring accommodation in the presbyopic eye. One method that can be used to provide insight into this complex area is Finite Element Analysis (FEA). The effectiveness of FEA in modelling the accommodative process has been illustrated by a number of accommodative FEA models developed to date. However, there have been limitations to these previous models; principally due to the variation in data on the geometry of the accommodative components, combined with sparse measurements of their material properties. Despite advances in available data, continued oversimplification has occurred in the modelling of the crystalline lens structure and the zonular fibres that surround the lens. A new accommodation model was proposed by the author that aims to eliminate these limitations. A novel representation of the zonular structure was developed, combined with updated lens and capsule modelling methods. The model has been designed to be adaptable so that a range of different age accommodation systems can be modelled, allowing the age related changes that occur to be simulated. The new modelling methods were validated by comparing the changes induced within the model to available in vivo data, leading to the definition of three different age models. These were used in an extended sensitivity study on age related changes, where individual parameters were altered to investigate their effect on the accommodative process. The material properties were found to have the largest impact on the decline in accommodative ability, in particular compared to changes in ciliary body movement or zonular structure. Novel data on the importance of the capsule stiffness and thickness was also established. The new model detailed within this thesis provides further insight into the accommodation mechanism, as well as a foundation for future, more detailed investigations into accommodation, presbyopia and accommodative restoration techniques.

Influence of presbyopic corrections on driving-related eye and head movements

Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic vision corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when viewing and responding to driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Participants included 20 presbyopes (mean age: 56.1 ± 5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections, apart from single vision (SV) reading spectacles. Each participant wore five different vision corrections: distance SV lenses, progressive addition spectacle lenses (PAL), bifocal spectacle lenses (BIF), monovision (MV) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL). For each visual condition, participants were required to view videotape recordings of traffic scenes, track a reference vehicle, and identify a series of peripherally presented targets. Digital numerical display panels were also included as near visual stimuli (simulating the visual displays of a vehicle speedometer and radio). Eye and head movements were measured, and the accuracy of target recognition was also recorded. Results: The path length of eye movements while viewing and responding to driving-related traffic scenes was significantly longer when wearing BIF and PAL than MV and MTF CL (both p ≤ 0.013). The path length of head movements was greater with SV, BIF, and PAL than MV and MTF CL (all p < 0.001). Target recognition and brake response times were not significantly affected by vision correction, whereas target recognition was less accurate when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze (p = 0.008), regardless of vision correction. Conclusions: Different presbyopic vision corrections alter eye and head movement patterns. The longer path length of eye and head movements and greater number of saccades associated with the spectacle presbyopic corrections may affect some aspects of driving performance.

Influence of presbyopic corrections on driving-related eye and head movements

Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic refractive corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when searching for dynamic targets in driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Eye and head movements of 20 presbyopes (mean age = 56.2 ± 5.7 years), who had no experience of wearing presbyopic corrections or were unadapted wearers were recorded using the faceLABTM eye and head tracker, while wearing five different corrections: single vision lenses (SV), progressive addition lenses (PALs), bifocal spectacles (BIF), monovision and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CLs) in random order (within-subjects comparison). Recorded traffic scenes of suburban roads and expressways with edited targets were viewed as dynamic stimuli. Results: The magnitude of eye and head movements was significantly greater for SV, BIF and PALs than monovision and MTF CLs (p < 0.001). In addition, BIF wear led to more eye movements than PAL wear (p = 0.017), while PAL wear resulted in greater head movements than SV wear (p = 0.018). The ratio of eye to head movement was smaller for PALs than all other groups (p < 0.001). The number of saccades made to fixate a target was significantly higher for BIF and PALs than monovision or MTF CLs (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Different presbyopic corrections can alter eye and head movement patterns. Wearing spectacles such as BIF and PALs produced relatively greater eye and head movements and saccades when viewing dynamic targets. The impact of these changes in eye and head movement patterns may have implications for driving performance under real world driving conditions.

Driving-related eye and head movements are changed by the type of presbyopic correction

Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic vision corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when viewing dynamic driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Participants included 20 presbyopes (mean age: 56±5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections (i.e. all were single vision wearers). Eye and head movements were recorded while wearing five different vision corrections: single vision lenses (SV), progressive addition spectacle lenses (PALs), bifocal spectacle lenses (BIF), monovision (MV) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL) in random order. Videotape recordings of traffic scenes of suburban roads and expressways (with edited targets) were presented as dynamic driving-related stimuli and digital numeric display panels included as near visual stimuli (simulating speedometer and radio). Eye and head movements were recorded using the faceLAB™ system and the accuracy of target identification was also recorded. Results: The magnitude of eye movements while viewing the driving-related traffic scenes was greater when wearing BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p≤0.013). The magnitude of head movements was greater when wearing SV, BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p<0.0001) and the number of saccades was significantly higher for BIF and PALs than MV (p≤0.043). Target recognition accuracy was poorer for all vision corrections when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze (p=0.008), and PALs gave better performance than MTF CL (p=0.043). Conclusions: Different presbyopic vision corrections alter eye and head movement patterns. In particular, the larger magnitude of eye and head movements and greater number of saccades associated with the spectacle presbyopic corrections, may impact on driving performance.

Effect of presbyopic vision corrections on perceptions of driving difficulty

Objectives: As the population ages, more people will be wearing presbyopic vision corrections when driving. However, little is known about the impact of these vision corrections on driving performance. This study aimed to determine the subjective driving difficulties experienced when wearing a range of common presbyopic contact lens and spectacle corrections.----- Methods: A questionnaire was developed and piloted that included a series of items regarding difficulties experienced while driving under daytime and night-time conditions (rated on five-point and seven-point Likert scales). Participants included 255 presbyopic patients recruited through local optometry practices. Participants were categorized into five age-matched groups; including those wearing no vision correction for driving (n = 50), bifocal spectacles (n = 54), progressive spectacles (n = 50), monovision contact lenses (n = 53), and multifocal contact lenses (n = 48).----- Results: Overall, ratings of satisfaction during daytime driving were relatively high for all correction types. However, multifocal contact lens wearers were significantly less satisfied with aspects of their vision during night-time than daytime driving, particularly regarding disturbances from glare and haloes. Progressive spectacle lens wearers noticed more distortion of peripheral vision, whereas bifocal spectacle wearers reported more difficulties with tasks requiring changes of focus and those who wore no optical correction for driving reported problems with intermediate and near tasks. Overall, satisfaction was significantly higher for progressive spectacles than bifocal spectacles for driving.----- Conclusions: Subjective visual experiences of different presbyopic vision corrections when driving vary depending on the vision tasks and lighting level. Eye-care practitioners should be aware of the driving-related difficulties experienced with each vision correction type and the need to select corrective types that match the driving needs of their patients.

The impact of presbyopic spectacles and contact lenses on driving performance

Presbyopia affects individuals from the age of 45 years onwards, resulting in difficulty in accurately focusing on near objects. There are many optical corrections available including spectacles or contact lenses that are designed to enable presbyopes to see clearly at both far and near distances. However, presbyopic vision corrections also disturb aspects of visual function under certain circumstances. The impact of these changes on activities of daily living such as driving are, however, poorly understood. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine which aspects of driving performance might be affected by wearing different types of presbyopic vision corrections. In order to achieve this aim, three experiments were undertaken. The first experiment involved administration of a questionnaire to compare the subjective driving difficulties experienced when wearing a range of common presbyopic contact lens and spectacle corrections. The questionnaire was developed and piloted, and included a series of items regarding difficulties experienced while driving under day and night-time conditions. Two hundred and fifty five presbyopic patients responded to the questionnaire and were categorised into five groups, including those wearing no vision correction for driving (n = 50), bifocal spectacles (BIF, n = 54), progressive addition lenses spectacles (PAL, n = 50), monovision (MV, n = 53) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL, n = 48). Overall, ratings of satisfaction during daytime driving were relatively high for all correction types. However, MV and MTF CL wearers were significantly less satisfied with aspects of their vision during night-time than daytime driving, particularly with regard to disturbances from glare and haloes. Progressive addition lens wearers noticed more distortion of peripheral vision, while BIF wearers reported more difficulties with tasks requiring changes in focus and those who wore no vision correction for driving reported problems with intermediate and near tasks. Overall, the mean level of satisfaction for daytime driving was quite high for all of the groups (over 80%), with the BIF wearers being the least satisfied with their vision for driving. Conversely, at night, MTF CL wearers expressed the least satisfaction. Research into eye and head movements has become increasingly of interest in driving research as it provides a means of understanding how the driver responds to visual stimuli in traffic. Previous studies have found that wearing PAL can affect eye and head movement performance resulting in slower eye movement velocities and longer times to stabilize the gaze for fixation. These changes in eye and head movement patterns may have implications for driving safety, given that the visual tasks for driving include a range of dynamic search tasks. Therefore, the second study was designed to investigate the influence of different presbyopic corrections on driving-related eye and head movements under standardized laboratory-based conditions. Twenty presbyopes (mean age: 56.1 ± 5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections, apart from single vision reading spectacles, were recruited. Each participant wore five different types of vision correction: single vision distance lenses (SV), PAL, BIF, MV and MTF CL. For each visual condition, participants were required to view videotape recordings of traffic scenes, track a reference vehicle and identify a series of peripherally presented targets while their eye and head movements were recorded using the faceLAB® eye and head tracking system. Digital numerical display panels were also included as near visual stimuli (simulating the visual displays of a vehicle speedometer and radio). The results demonstrated that the path length of eye movements while viewing and responding to driving-related traffic scenes was significantly longer when wearing BIF and PAL than MV and MTF CL. The path length of head movements was greater with SV, BIF and PAL than MV and MTF CL. Target recognition was less accurate when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze, regardless of vision correction type. The third experiment aimed to investigate the real world driving performance of presbyopes while wearing different vision corrections measured on a closed-road circuit at night-time. Eye movements were recorded using the ASL Mobile Eye, eye tracking system (as the faceLAB® system proved to be impractical for use outside of the laboratory). Eleven participants (mean age: 57.25 ± 5.78 years) were fitted with four types of prescribed vision corrections (SV, PAL, MV and MTF CL). The measures of driving performance on the closed-road circuit included distance to sign recognition, near target recognition, peripheral light-emitting-diode (LED) recognition, low contrast road hazards recognition and avoidance, recognition of all the road signs, time to complete the course, and driving behaviours such as braking, accelerating, and cornering. The results demonstrated that driving performance at night was most affected by MTF CL compared to PAL, resulting in shorter distances to read signs, slower driving speeds, and longer times spent fixating road signs. Monovision resulted in worse performance in the task of distance to read a signs compared to SV and PAL. The SV condition resulted in significantly more errors made in interpreting information from in-vehicle devices, despite spending longer time fixating on these devices. Progressive addition lenses were ranked as the most preferred vision correction, while MTF CL were the least preferred vision correction for night-time driving. This thesis addressed the research question of how presbyopic vision corrections affect driving performance and the results of the three experiments demonstrated that the different types of presbyopic vision corrections (e.g. BIF, PAL, MV and MTF CL) can affect driving performance in different ways. Distance-related driving tasks showed reduced performance with MV and MTF CL, while tasks which involved viewing in-vehicle devices were significantly hampered by wearing SV corrections. Wearing spectacles such as SV, BIF and PAL induced greater eye and head movements in the simulated driving condition, however this did not directly translate to impaired performance on the closed- road circuit tasks. These findings are important for understanding the influence of presbyopic vision corrections on vision under real world driving conditions. They will also assist the eye care practitioner to understand and convey to patients the potential driving difficulties associated with wearing certain types of presbyopic vision corrections and accordingly to support them in the process of matching patients to optical corrections which meet their visual needs.

Wavefront aberrations and the depth of focus of the human eye

The depth of focus (DOF) can be defined as the variation in image distance of a lens or an optical system which can be tolerated without incurring an objectionable lack of sharpness of focus. The DOF of the human eye serves a mechanism of blur tolerance. As long as the target image remains within the depth of focus in the image space, the eye will still perceive the image as being clear. A large DOF is especially important for presbyopic patients with partial or complete loss of accommodation (presbyopia), since this helps them to obtain an acceptable retinal image when viewing a target moving through a range of near to intermediate distances. The aim of this research was to investigate the DOF of the human eye and its association with the natural wavefront aberrations, and how higher order aberrations (HOAs) can be used to expand the DOF, in particular by inducing spherical aberrations ( 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z ). The depth of focus of the human eye can be measured using a variety of subjective and objective methods. Subjective measurements based on a Badal optical system have been widely adopted, through which the retinal image size can be kept constant. In such measurements, the subject.s tested eye is normally cyclopleged. Objective methods without the need of cycloplegia are also used, where the eye.s accommodative response is continuously monitored. Generally, the DOF measured by subjective methods are slightly larger than those measured objectively. In recent years, methods have also been developed to estimate DOF from retinal image quality metrics (IQMs) derived from the ocular wavefront aberrations. In such methods, the DOF is defined as the range of defocus error that degrades the retinal image quality calculated from the IQMs to a certain level of the possible maximum value. In this study, the effect of different amounts of HOAs on the DOF was theoretically evaluated by modelling and comparing the DOF of subjects from four different clinical groups, including young emmetropes (20 subjects), young myopes (19 subjects), presbyopes (32 subjects) and keratoconics (35 subjects). A novel IQM-based through-focus algorithm was developed to theoretically predict the DOF of subjects with their natural HOAs. Additional primary spherical aberration ( 0 4 Z ) was also induced in the wavefronts of myopes and presbyopes to simulate the effect of myopic refractive correction (e.g. LASIK) and presbyopic correction (e.g. progressive power IOL) on the subject.s DOF. Larger amounts of HOAs were found to lead to greater values of predicted DOF. The introduction of primary spherical aberration was found to provide moderate increase of DOF while slightly deteriorating the image quality at the same time. The predicted DOF was also affected by the IQMs and the threshold level adopted. We then investigated the influence of the chosen threshold level of the IQMs on the predicted DOF, and how it relates to the subjectively measured DOF. The subjective DOF was measured in a group of 17 normal subjects, and we used through-focus visual Strehl ratio based on optical transfer function (VSOTF) derived from their wavefront aberrations as the IQM to estimate the DOF. The results allowed comparison of the subjective DOF with the estimated DOF and determination of a threshold level for DOF estimation. Significant correlation was found between the subject.s estimated threshold level for the estimated DOF and HOA RMS (Pearson.s r=0.88, p<0.001). The linear correlation can be used to estimate the threshold level for each individual subject, subsequently leading to a method for estimating individual.s DOF from a single measurement of their wavefront aberrations. A subsequent study was conducted to investigate the DOF of keratoconic subjects. Significant increases of the level of HOAs, including spherical aberration, coma and trefoil, can be observed in keratoconic eyes. This population of subjects provides an opportunity to study the influence of these HOAs on DOF. It was also expected that the asymmetric aberrations (coma and trefoil) in the keratoconic eye could interact with defocus to cause regional blur of the target. A dual-Badal-channel optical system with a star-pattern target was used to measure the subjective DOF in 10 keratoconic eyes and compared to those from a group of 10 normal subjects. The DOF measured in keratoconic eyes was significantly larger than that in normal eyes. However there was not a strong correlation between the large amount of HOA RMS and DOF in keratoconic eyes. Among all HOA terms, spherical aberration was found to be the only HOA that helped to significantly increase the DOF in the studied keratoconic subjects. Through the first three studies, a comprehensive understanding of DOF and its association to the HOAs in the human eye had been achieved. An adaptive optics system was then designed and constructed. The system was capable of measuring and altering the wavefront aberrations in the subject.s eye and measuring the resulting DOF under the influence of different combination of HOAs. Using the AO system, we investigated the concept of extending the DOF through optimized combinations of 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z . Systematic introduction of a targeted amount of both 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z was found to significantly improve the DOF of healthy subjects. The use of wavefront combinations of 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z with opposite signs can further expand the DOF, rather than using 0 4 Z or 0 6 Z alone. The optimal wavefront combinations to expand the DOF were estimated using the ratio of increase in DOF and loss of retinal image quality defined by VSOTF. In the experiment, the optimal combinations of 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z were found to provide a better balance of DOF expansion and relatively smaller decreases in VA. Therefore, the optimal combinations of 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z provides a more efficient method to expand the DOF rather than 0 4 Z or 0 6 Z alone. This PhD research has shown that there is a positive correlation between the DOF and the eye.s wavefront aberrations. More aberrated eyes generally have a larger DOF. The association of DOF and the natural HOAs in normal subjects can be quantified, which allows the estimation of DOF directly from the ocular wavefront aberration. Among the Zernike HOA terms, spherical aberrations ( 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z ) were found to improve the DOF. Certain combinations of 0 4 Z and 0 6 Z provide a more effective method to expand DOF than using 0 4 Z or 0 6 Z alone, and this could be useful in the optimal design of presbyopic optical corrections such as multifocal contact lenses, intraocular lenses and laser corneal surgeries.

Impact in contact lenses and the anterior eye:challenges prevailing in 2015

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?

Randomized crossover trial of silicone hydrogel presbyopic contact lenses

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.

Investigating the utility of clinical assessments to predict success with presbyopic contact lens correction

PURPOSE: To determine the utility of a range of clinical and non-clinical indicators to aid the initial selection of the optimum presbyopic contact lens. In addition, to assess whether lens preference was influenced by the visual performance compared to the other designs trialled (intra-subject) or compared to participants who preferred other designs (inter-subject). METHODS: A double-masked randomised crossover trial of Air Optix Aqua multifocal, PureVision 2 for Presbyopia, Acuvue OASYS for Presbyopia, Biofinity multifocal and monovision was conducted on 35 presbyopes (54.3±6.2years). Participant lifestyle, personality, pupil characteristics and aberrometry were assessed prior to lens fitting. After 4 weeks of wear, high and low contrast visual acuity (VA) under photopic and mesopic conditions, reading speed, Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) rating, subjective quality-of-vision scoring, defocus curves, stereopsis, halometry, aberrometry and ocular physiology were quantified. RESULTS: After trialling all the lenses, preference was mixed (n=12 Biofinity, n=10 monovision, n=7 Purevision, n=4 Air Optix Aqua, n=2 Oasys). Lens preference was not dependent on personality (F=1.182, p=0.323) or the hours spent working at near (p=0.535) or intermediate (p=0.759) distances. No intersubject or strong intrasubject relationships emerged between lens preference and reading speed, NAVQ rating, halo size, aberrometry or ocular physiology (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Participant lifestyle and personality, ocular optics, contact lens visual performance and ocular physiology provided poor indicators of the preferred lens type after 4 weeks of wear. This is confounded by the wide range of task visual demands of presbyopes and the limited optical differences between current multifocal contact lens designs.