195 resultados para Wolffsohn, DavidWolffsohn, DavidDavidWolffsohn
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To examine the optimum time at which fluorescein patterns of gas permeable lenses (GPs) should be evaluated. METHODS: Aligned, 0.2mm steep and 0.2mm flat GPs were fitted to 17 patients (aged 20.6±1.1 years, 10 male). Fluorescein was applied to their upper temporal bulbar conjunctiva with a moistened fluorescein strip. Digital slit lamp images (CSO, Italy) at 10× magnification of the fluorescein pattern viewed with blue light through a yellow filter were captured every 15s. Fluorescein intensity in central, mid peripheral and edge regions of the superior, inferior, temporal and nasal quadrants of the lens were graded subjectively using a +2 to -2 scale and using ImageJ software on the simultaneously captured images. RESULTS: Subjectively graded and objectively image analysed fluorescein intensity changed with time (p<0.001), lens region (centre, mid-periphery and edge: p<0.05) and there was interaction between lens region with lens fit (p<0.001). For edge band width, there was a significant effect of time (F=118.503, p<0.001) and lens fit (F=5.1249, p=0.012). The expected alignment, flat and steep fitting patterns could be seen from approximately after 30 to 180s subjectively and 15 to 105s in captured images. CONCLUSION: Although the stability of fluorescein intensity can start to decline in as little as 45s post fluorescein instillation, the diagnostic pattern of alignment, steep or flat fit is seen in each meridian by subjective observation from about 30s to 3min indicating this is the most appropriate time window to evaluate GP lenses in clinical practice.
Resumo:
Aim: To appraise history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations, to determine current practice and to make recommendations for best practice. Method: The peer reviewed academic literature was reviewed and the results informed a survey completed by 256 eye care practitioners (ECPs) on their current practice and influences. Results: The last eye-test date, last contact lens aftercare (for existing wearers) and reason for visit are key questions for most ECPs. Detailed use of contact lens questions are more commonly applied in aftercares than when refitting patients who have previously discontinued wear (87% vs 56% use), whereas questions on ocular and general history, medication and lifestyle were generally more commonly utilised for new patients than in aftercares (72% vs 50%). 75% of ECPs requested patients bring a list of their medication to appointments. Differential diagnosis questioning was thorough in most ECPs (87% of relevant questions asked). Attempts to optimise compliance included oral instruction (95% always) and written patient instructions (95% at least sometimes). Abbreviations were used by 39% of respondents (26% used ones provided by a professional body). Conclusion: There is scope for more consistency in history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations and recommendations are made.
Resumo:
Aims: To survey eye care practitioners from around the world regarding their current practice for anterior eye health recording to inform guidelines on best practice. Methods: The on-line survey examined the reported use of: word descriptions, sketching, grading scales or photographs; paper or computerised record cards and whether these were guided by proforma headings; grading scale choice, signs graded, level of precision, regional grading; and how much time eye care practitioners spent on average on anterior eye health recording. Results: Eight hundred and nine eye care practitioners from across the world completed the survey. Word description (p <. 0.001), sketches (p = 0.002) and grading scales (p <. 0.001) were used more for recording the anterior eye health of contact lens patients than other patients, but photography was used similarly (p = 0.132). Of the respondents, 84.5% used a grading scale, 13.5% using two, with the original Efron (51.6%) and CCLRU/Brien-Holden-Vision-Institute (48.5%) being the most popular. The median features graded was 11 (range 1-23), frequency from 91.6% (bulbar hyperaemia) to 19.6% (endothelial blebs), with most practitioners grading to the nearest unit (47.4%) and just 14.7% to one decimal place. The average time taken to report anterior eye health was reported to be 6.8. ±. 5.7. min, with the maximum time available 14.0. ±. 11. min. Conclusions: Developed practice and research evidence allows best practice guidelines for anterior eye health recording to be recommended. It is recommended to: record which grading scale is used; always grade to one decimal place, record what you see live rather than based on how you intend to manage a condition; grade bulbar and limbal hyperaemia, limbal neovascularisation, conjunctival papillary redness and roughness (in white light to assess colouration with fluorescein instilled to aid visualisation of papillae/follicles), blepharitis, meibomian gland dysfunction and sketch staining (both corneal and conjunctival) at every visit. Record other anterior eye features only if they are remarkable, but indicate that the key tissue which have been examined.
Resumo:
Aim: To validate the accuracy and repeatability of a mobile app reading speed test compared with the traditional paper version. Method: Twenty-one subjects wearing their full refractive correction glasses read 14 sentences of decreasing print size between 1.0 and -0.1 logMAR, each consisting of 14 words (Radner reading speed test) at 40 cm with a paper-based chart and twice on iPad charts. Time duration was recorded with a stop watch for the paper chart and on the App itself for the mobile chart allowing critical print size (CPS) and optimal reading speed (ORS) to be derived objectively. Results: The ORS was higher for the mobile app charts (194±29 wpm; 195±25 wpm) compared with the paper chart (166±20 wpm; F=57.000, p<0.001). The CPS was lower for the mobile app charts (0.17±0.20 logMAR; 0.18±0.17 logMAR) compared with the paper chart (0.25±0.17 logMAR; F=5.406, p=0.009). The mobile app test had a mean difference repeatability of 0.30±22.5 wpm, r=0.917 for ORS, and a CPS of 0.0±0.2 logMAR, r=0.769. Conclusions: Repeatability of the app reading speed test is as good (ORS) or better (CPS) than previous studies on the paper test. While the results are not interchangeable with paper-based charts, mobile app tablet-based tests of reading speed are reliable and rapid to perform, with the potential to capture functional visual ability in research studies and clinical practice.
Resumo:
Purpose: To quantify the end-of-day silicone-hydrogel daily disposable contact lens fit and its influence of on ocular comfort, physiology and lens wettability. Methods: Thirty-nine subjects (22.1. ±. 3.5 years) were randomised to wear each of 3 silicone-hydrogel daily-disposable contact lenses (narafilcon A, delefilcon A and filcon II 3), bilaterally, for one week. Lens fit was assessed objectively using a digital video slit-lamp at 8, 12 and 16. h after lens insertion. Hyperaemia, non-invasive tear break-up time, tear meniscus height and comfort were also evaluated at these timepoints, while corneal and conjunctival staining were assessed on lens removal. Results: Lens fit assessments were not different between brands (P > 0.05), with the exception of the movement at blink where narafilcon A was more mobile. Overall, lag reduced but push-up speed increased from 8 to 12. h (P <. 0.05), but remained stable from 12 to 16. h (P > 0.05). Movement-on-blink was unaffected by wear-time (F = 0.403, P = 0.670). A more mobile lens fit with one brand did not indicate that person would have a more mobile fit with another brand (r = -0.06 to 0.63). Lens fit was not correlated with comfort, ocular physiology or lens wettability (P > 0.01). Conclusions: Among the lenses tested, objective lens fit changed between 8. h and 12. h of lens wear. The weak correlation in individual lens fit between brands indicates that fit is dependent on more than ocular shape. Consequently, substitution of a different lens brand with similar parameters will not necessarily provide comparable lens fit.
Resumo:
Purpose: To assess the validity and repeatability of objective compared to subjective contact lens fit analysis. Methods: Thirty-five subjects (aged 22.0. ±. 3.0 years) wore two different soft contact lens designs. Four lens fit variables: centration, horizontal lag, post-blink movement in up-gaze and push-up recovery speed were assessed subjectively (four observers) and objectively from slit-lamp biomicroscopy captured images and video. The analysis was repeated a week later. Results: The average of the four experienced observers was compared to objective measures, but centration, movement on blink, lag and push-up recovery speed all varied significantly between them (p <. 0.001). Horizontal lens centration was on average close to central as assessed both objectively and subjectively (p > 0.05). The 95% confidence interval of subjective repeatability was better than objective assessment (±0.128. mm versus ±0.168. mm, p = 0.417), but utilised only 78% of the objective range. Vertical centration assessed objectively showed a slight inferior decentration (0.371. ±. 0.381. mm) with good inter- and intrasession repeatability (p > 0.05). Movement-on-blink was lower estimated subjectively than measured objectively (0.269. ±. 0.179. mm versus 0.352. ±. 0.355. mm; p = 0.035), but had better repeatability (±0.124. mm versus ±0.314. mm 95% confidence interval) unless correcting for the smaller range (47%). Horizontal lag was lower estimated subjectively (0.562. ±. 0.259. mm) than measured objectively (0.708. ±. 0.374. mm, p <. 0.001), had poorer repeatability (±0.132. mm versus ±0.089. mm 95% confidence interval) and had a smaller range (63%). Subjective categorisation of push-up speed of recovery showed reasonable differentiation relative to objective measurement (p <. 0.001). Conclusions: The objective image analysis allows an accurate, reliable and repeatable assessment of soft contact lens fit characteristics, being a useful tool for research and optimisation of lens fit in clinical practice.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of reducing the number of visual acuity measurements made in a defocus curve on the quality of data quantified. Setting: Midland Eye, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design: Evaluation of a technique. Methods: Defocus curves were constructed by measuring visual acuity on a distance logMAR letter chart, randomizing the test letters between lens presentations. The lens powers evaluated ranged between +1.50 diopters (D) and -5.00 D in 0.50 D steps, which were also presented in a randomized order. Defocus curves were measured binocularly with the Tecnis diffractive, Rezoom refractive, Lentis rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D addition [add]), and Finevision trifocal multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) implanted bilaterally, and also for the diffractive IOL and refractive or rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D and +1.50 D adds) multifocal IOLs implanted contralaterally. Relative and absolute range of clear-focus metrics and area metrics were calculated for curves fitted using 0.50 D, 1.00 D, and 1.50 D steps and a near add-specific profile (ie, distance, half the near add, and the full near-add powers). Results: A significant difference in simulated results was found in at least 1 of the relative or absolute range of clear-focus or area metrics for each of the multifocal designs examined when the defocus-curve step size was increased (P<.05). Conclusion: Faster methods of capturing defocus curves from multifocal IOL designs appear to distort the metric results and are therefore not valid. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. © 2013 ASCRS and ESCRS.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Contrast detection is an important aspect of the assessment of visual function; however, clinical tests evaluate limited spatial frequencies and contrasts. This study validates the accuracy and inter-test repeatability of a swept-frequency near and distance mobile app Aston contrast sensitivity test, which overcomes this limitation compared to traditional charts. METHOD: Twenty subjects wearing their full refractive correction underwent contrast sensitivity testing on the new near application (near app), distance app, CSV-1000 and Pelli-Robson charts with full correction and with vision degraded by 0.8 and 0.2 Bangerter degradation foils. In addition repeated measures using the 0.8 occluding foil were taken. RESULTS: The mobile apps (near more than distance, p = 0.005) recorded a higher contrast sensitivity than printed tests (p < 0.001); however, all charts showed a reduction in measured contrast sensitivity with degradation (p < 0.001) and a similar decrease with increasing spatial frequency (interaction > 0.05). Although the coefficient of repeatability was lowest for the Pelli-Robson charts (0.14 log units), the mobile app charts measured more spatial frequencies, took less time and were more repeatable (near: 0.26 to 0.37 log units; distance: 0.34 to 0.39 log units) than the CSV-1000 (0.30 to 0.93 log units). The duration to complete the CSV-1000 was 124 ± 37 seconds, Pelli-Robson 78 ± 27 seconds, near app 53 ± 15 seconds and distance app 107 ± 36 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: While there were differences between charts in contrast levels measured, the new Aston near and distance apps are valid, repeatable and time-efficient method of assessing contrast sensitivity at multiple spatial frequencies.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate distance and near image quality after hybrid bi-aspheric multifocal central presbyLASIK treatments. Design: Consecutive case series. Methods: Sixty-four eyes of 32 patients consecutively treated with central presbyLASIK were assessed. The mean age of the patients was 51 ± 3 years with a mean spherical equivalent refraction of-1.08 ± 2.62 diopters (D) and mean astigmatism of 0.52 ± 0.42 D. Monocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), corrected near visual acuity (CNVA), and distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) of nondominant eyes; binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA); uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA); distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA); and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Subjective quality of vision and near vision was assessed using the 10-item Rasch-scaled Quality of Vision and Near Activity Visual Questionnaire, respectively. Results: At 1 year postoperatively, 93% of patients achieved 20/20 or better binocular UDVA; 90% and 97% of patients had J2 or better UNVA and UIVA, respectively; 7% lost 2 Snellen lines of CDVA; Strehl ratio reduced by ~-4% ± 14%. Defocus curves revealed a loss of half a Snellen line at best focus, with no change for intermediate vergence (-1.25 D) and a mean gain of 2 lines for near vergence (-3 D). Conclusions: Presbyopic treatment using a hybrid bi-aspheric micro-monovision ablation profile is safe and efficacious. The postoperative outcomes indicate improvements in binocular vision at far, intermediate, and near distances with improved contrast sensitivity. A 19% retreatment rate should be considered to increase satisfaction levels, besides a 3% reversal rate.
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:
This study identifies and investigates the potential use of in-eye trigger mechanisms to supplement the widely available information on release of ophthalmic drugs from contact lenses under passive release conditions. Ophthalmic dyes and surrogates have been successfully employed to investigate how these factors can be drawn together to make a successful system. The storage of a drug-containing lens in a pH lower than that of the ocular environment can be used to establish an equilibrium that favours retention of the drug in the lens prior to ocular insertion. Although release under passive conditions does not result in complete dye elution, the use of mechanical agitation techniques which mimic the eyelid blink action in conjunction with ocular tear chemistry promotes further release. In this way differentiation between passive and triggered in vitro release characteristics can be established. Investigation of the role of individual tear proteins revealed significant differences in their ability to alter the equilibrium between matrix-held and eluate-held dye or drug. These individual experiments were then investigated in vivo using ophthalmic dyes. Complete elution was found to be achievable in-eye; this demonstrated the importance of that fraction of the drug retained under passive conditions and the triggering effect of in-eye conditions on the release process. Understanding both the structure-property relationship between drug and material and in-eye trigger mechanisms, using ophthalmic dyes as a surrogate, provides the basis of knowledge necessary to design ocular drug delivery vehicles for in-eye release in a controllable manner.
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.
Resumo:
Purpose: To investigate how initial HEMA and silicone-hydrogel (SiHy) contact lens fit on insertion, which informs prescribing decisions, reflect end of day fit. Methods: Thirty participants (aged 22.9. ±. 4.9 years) were fitted contralaterally with HEMA and SiHy contact lenses. Corneal topography and tear break-up time were assessed pre-lens wear. Centration, lag, post-blink movement during up-gaze and push-up recovery speed were recorded after 5,10,20. min and 8. h of contact lens wear by a digital slit-lamp biomicroscope camera, along with reported comfort. Lens fit metrics were analysed using bespoke software. Results: Comfort and centration were similar with the HEMA and SiHy lenses (p > 0.05), but comfort decreased with time (p <. 0.01) whereas centration remained stable (F = 0.036, p = 0.991). Movement-on-blink and lag were greater with the HEMA than the SiHy lens (p <. 0.01), but movement-on-blink decreased with time after insertion (F = 22.423, p <. 0.001) whereas lag remained stable (F = 1.967, p = 0.129). Push-up recovery speed was similar with the HEMA and the SiHy lens 5-20. min after insertion (p > 0.05), but was slower with SiHy after 8. h wear (p = 0.016). Lens movement on blink and push-up recovery speed was predictive of the movement after 8. h of wear after 10-20. min SiHy wear, but after 5 to 20. min of HEMA lens wear. Conclusions: A HEMA or SiHy contact lens with poor movement on blink/push-up after at least 10. min after insertion should be rejected.
Resumo:
Purpose: The Shin-Nippon SRW-5000 is an open view autorefractor that superseded the Canon R-1 autorefractor in the mid-1990s and has been used widely in optometry and vision science laboratories. It has been used to measure refractive error, accommodation responses both statically and dynamically, off-axis refractive error, and adapted to measure pupil size. This paper presents an overview of the original 2001 clinical evaluation of the SRW-5000 in adults (Mallen et al., Ophthal Physiol Opt 2001; 21: 101) and provides an update on the use and modification of the instrument since the original publication. Recent findings: The SRW-5000 instrument, and the family of devices which followed, have shown excellent validity, repeatability, and utility in clinical and research settings. The instruments have also shown great potential for increased research functionality following a number of modifications. Summary: The SRW-5000 and its derivatives have been, and continue to be, of significant importance in our drive to understand myopia progression, myopia control techniques, and oculomotor function in human vision.