Orthokeratology vs. spectacles:adverse events and discontinuations

Purpose. To assess the relative clinical success of orthokeratology contact lenses (OK) and distance single-vision spectacles (SV) in children in terms of incidences of adverse events and discontinuations over a 2-year period. Methods. Sixty-one subjects 6 to 12 years of age with myopia of - 0.75 to - 4.00DS and astigmatism =1.00DC were prospectively allocated OK or SV correction. Subjects were followed at 6-month intervals and advised to report to the clinic immediately should adverse events occur. Adverse events were categorized into serious, significant, and non-significant. Discontinuation was defined as cessation of lens wear for the remainder of the study. Results. Thirty-one children were corrected with OK and 30 with SV. A higher incidence of adverse events was found with OK compared with SV (p < 0.001). Nine OK subjects experienced 16 adverse events (7 significant and 9 non-significant). No adverse events were found in the SV group. Most adverse events were found between 6 and 12 months of lens wear, with 11 solely attributable to OK wear. Significantly more discontinuations were found with SV in comparison with OK (p < 0.05). Conclusions. The relatively low incidence of adverse events and discontinuations with OK is conducive for the correction of myopia in children with OK contact lenses.

Factors preventing myopia progression with orthokeratology correction

PURPOSE: To examine which baseline measurements constitute predictive factors for axial length growth over 2 years in children wearing orthokeratology contact lenses (OK) and single-vision spectacles (SV). METHODS: Sixty-one children were prospectively assigned to wear either OK (n = 31) or SV (n = 30) for 2 years. The primary outcome measure (dependent variable) was axial length change at 2 years relative to baseline. Other measurements (independent variables) were age, age of myopia onset, gender, myopia progression 2 years before baseline and baseline myopia, anterior chamber depth, corneal power and shape (p value), and iris and pupil diameters as well as parental refraction. The contribution of all independent variables to the 2-year change in axial length was assessed using univariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: After univariate analyses, smaller increases in axial length were found in the OK group compared to the SV group in children who were older, had earlier onset of myopia, were female, had lower rate of myopia progression before baseline, had less myopia at baseline, had longer anterior chamber depth, had greater corneal power, had more prolate corneal shape, had larger iris diameter, had larger pupil sizes, and had lower levels of parental myopia (all p < 0.05). In multivariate analyses, older age and greater corneal power were associated with smaller increases in axial length in the OK group (both p < 0.05), whereas in SV wearers, smaller iris diameter was associated with smaller increases in axial length (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Orthokeratology is a successful treatment option in controlling axial elongation compared to SV in children of older age, had earlier onset of myopia, were female, had lower rate of myopia progression before baseline, had lower myopia at baseline, had longer anterior chamber depth, had greater corneal power, had more prolate corneal shape, had larger iris and pupil diameters, and had lower levels of parental myopia. © American Academy of Optometry.

Short-term changes in ocular biometry and refraction after discontinuation of long-term orthokeratology

OBJECTIVE: To assess refractive and biometric changes 1 week after discontinuation of lens wear in subjects who had been wearing orthokeratology (OK) contact lenses for 2 years. METHODS: Twenty-nine subjects aged 6 to 12 years and with myopia of -0.75 to -4.00 diopters (D) and astigmatism of ≤1.00 D participated in the study. Measurements of axial length and anterior chamber depth (Zeiss IOLMaster), corneal power and shape, and cycloplegic refraction were taken 1 week after discontinuation and compared with those at baseline and after 24 months of lens wear. RESULTS: A hyperopic shift was found at 24 months relative to baseline in spherical equivalent refractive error (+1.86±1.01 D), followed by a myopic shift at 1 week relative to 24 months (-1.93±0.92 D) (both P<0.001). Longer axial lengths were found at 24 months and 1 week in comparison to baseline (0.47±0.18 and 0.51±0.18 mm, respectively) (both P<0.001). The increase in axial length at 1 week relative to 24 months was statistically significant (0.04±0.06 mm; P=0.006). Anterior chamber depth did not change significantly over time (P=0.31). Significant differences were found between 24 months and 1 week relative to baseline and between 1-week and 24-month visits in mean corneal power (-1.68±0.80, -0.44±0.32, and 1.23±0.70 D, respectively) (all P≤0.001). Refractive change at 1 week in comparison to 24 months strongly correlated with changes in corneal power (r=-0.88; P<0.001) but not with axial length changes (r=-0.09; P=0.66). Corneal shape changed significantly between the baseline and 1-week visits (0.15±0.10 D; P<0.001). Corneal shape changed from a prolate to a more oblate corneal shape at the 24-month and 1-week visits in comparison to baseline (both P≤0.02) but did not change significantly between 24 months and 1 week (P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of long-term OK on ocular biometry and refraction are still present after 1-week discontinuation of lens wear. Refractive change after discontinuation of long-term OK is primarily attributed to the recovery of corneal shape and not to an increase in the axial length.

Editorial

Welcome to the latest issue of Contact Lens and Anterior Eye. In this issue, Kuldeep Razaida provides a fascinating look at fitting prosthetic lenses to patients in India. I had the good fortune of visiting his clinic in August 2006 at the LV Prasad Eye Institute in Hyderabad, India and was humbled by the vast expertise within the one building. The institute started in 1987 and is the brainchild of the infamous Professor Rao. I think there are few such places in the world where the clinicians work so passionately in treating such interesting patients (for details regarding the LV Prasad Eye Institute see www.lvpei.org). I was in Hyderabad courtesy of IACLE (see issue 29:5 for an editorial by Judith Morris and Sonja Cronje about IACLE) and was able to share ideas with contact lens educators from across the world (for more information on IACLE see www.iacle.org). The issue contains some regular contact lens type papers too; with our aging population readers will be particularly interested in a paper by Mike Freeman and Neil Charman looking at modified monovision with diffractive bifocal lenses. There is an article looking at visual problems with video display terminal use and a study looking at the effects of surface treatment of silicone hydrogel contact lenses. There is an interesting piece from Dr Aisling Mann of Aston University looking at tear protein analysis; this article contains one CET point too for readers who complete the attached multiple choice questions before the relevant deadline. Also, congratulations to the BCLA members who successfully undertook the Fellowship of the BCLA at this year's BCLA conference in Manchester. If you are interested in undertaking the Fellowship please look at the details on the BCLA web page (http://www.bcla.org.uk/fellowship.asp). Amongst the case reports in this issue of CLAE you will notice one from Andrew Elder-Smith, this particular case report was presented as part of his successful Fellowship submission in 2006 and was thought to be of particular good quality by the examiners who asked Andrew to kindly submit it for publication to Contact Lens and Anterior Eye as an example for potential candidates. Finally, it is my sad duty to report the death of Howard Gee earlier this year, a past council member of the BCLA. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

Editorial

The American Academy of Optometry (AAO) had their annual meeting in San Diego in December 2005 and the BCLA and CLAE were well represented there. The BCLA does have a reasonable number of non-UK based members and hopefully in the future will attract more. This will certainly be beneficial to the society as a whole and may draw more delegates to the BCLA annual conference. To increase awareness of the BCLA at the AAO a special evening seminar was arranged where BCLA president Dr. James Wolffsohn gave his presidential address. Dr. Wolffsohn has given the presidential address in the UK, Ireland, Hong Kong and Japan – making it the most travelled presidential address for the BCLA to date. Aside from the BCLA activity at the AAO there were numerous lectures of interest to all, truly a “something for everyone” meeting. All the sessions were multi-track (often up to 10 things occurring at the same time) and the biggest dilemma was often deciding what to attend and more importantly what you will miss! Nearly 200 new AAO Fellows were inducted at the Gala Dinner from many countries including 3 new fellows from the UK (this year they all just happened to be from Aston University!). It is certainly one of the highlights of the AAO to see fellows from different schools of training from around the world fulfilling the same criteria and being duly rewarded for their commitment to the profession. BCLA members will be aware that 2006 sees the introduction of the new fellowship scheme of the BCLA and by the time you read this the first set of fellowship examinations will have taken place. For more details of the FBCLA scheme see the BCLA web site http://www.bcla.org.uk. Since many of CLAE's editorial panel were at the AAO an informal meeting and dinner was arranged for them where ideas were exchanged about the future of the journal. It is envisaged that the panel will meet twice a year – the next meeting will be at the BCLA conference. The biggest excitement by far was the fact that CLAE is now Medline/PubMed indexed. You may ask why is this significant to CLAE? PubMed is the free web-based service from the US National Library of Medicine. It holds over 15 million biomedical citations and abstracts from the Medline database. Medline is the largest component of PubMed and covers over 4800 journals published in more than 70 countries. The impact of this is that CLAE is starting to attract more submissions as researchers and authors are not worried that their work will not be hidden from other colleagues in the field but rather the work is available to view on the World Wide Web. CLAE is one of a very small number of contact lens journals that is indexed this way. Amongst the other CL journals listed you will note that the International Contact Lens Clinic has now merged with CLAE and the journal CLAO has been renamed Eye and Contact Lenses – making the list of indexed CL journals even smaller than it appears. The on-line submission and reviewing system introduced in 2005 has also made it easier for authors to submit their work and easier for reviewers to check the content. This ease of use has lead to quicker times from submission to publication. Looking back at the articles published in CLAE in 2005 reveals some interesting facts. The majority of the material still tends to be from UK groups related to the field of Optometry, although we hope that in the future we will attract more work from non-UK groups and also from non-Optometric areas such as refractive surgery or anterior eye pathology. Interestingly in 2005 the most downloaded article from CLAE was “Wavefront technology: Past, present and future” by Professor W. Neil Charman, who was also the recipient of the Charles F. Prentice award at the AAO – one of the highest awards honours that the AAO can bestow. Professor Charman was also the keynote speaker at the BCLA's first Pioneer's Day meeting in 2004. In 2006, readers of CLAE will notice more changes, firstly we are moving to 5 issues per year. It is hoped that in the future, depending on increased submissions, a move to 6 issues may be feasible. Secondly, CLAE will aim to have one article per issue that carries CL CET points. You will see in this issue there is an article from Professor Mark Wilcox (who was a keynote speaker at the BCLA conference in 2005). In future articles that carry CET points will be either reviews from BCLA conference keynote speakers, members of the editorial panel or material from other invited persons that will be of interest to the readership of CLAE. Finally, in 2006, you will notice a change to the Editorial Panel, some of the distinguished panel felt that it was good time to step down and new members have been invited to join the remaining panel. The panel represent some of the most eminent names in the fields of contact lenses and/or anterior eye and have varying backgrounds and interests from many of the prominent institutions around the world. One of the tasks that the Editorial Panel undertake is to seek out possible submissions to the journal, either from conferences they attend (posters and papers that they will see and hear) and from their own research teams. However, on behalf of CLAE I would like to extend that invitation to seek original articles to all readers – if you hear a talk and think it could make a suitable publication to CLAE please ask the presenters to submit the work via the on-line submission system. If you found the work interesting then the chances are so will others. CLAE invites submissions that are original research, full length articles, short case reports, full review articles, technical reports and letters to the editor. The on-line submission web page is http://www.ees.elsevier.com/clae/.

Conjunctival UV autofluorescence - prevalence and risk factors

Purpose: Autofluorescence of ultraviolet (UV) light has been shown to occur in localised areas of the bulbar conjunctiva, which map to active cellular changes due to UV and environmental exposure. This study examined the presence of conjunctival UV autofluorescence in eye care practitioners (ECPs) across Europe and the Middle East and its associated risk factors. Method: Images were captured of 307 ECPs right eyes in the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Kuwait, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom using a Nikon D100 camera and dual flash units through UV filters. UV autofluorescence was outlined using ImageJ software and the nasal and temporal area quantified. Subjects were required to complete a questionnaire on their demographics and lifestyle including general exposure to UV and refractive correction. Results: Average age of the subjects was 38.5±12.2 years (range 19-68) and 39.7% were male. Sixty-two percent of eyes had some conjunctival damage as indicated by UV autofluorescence. The average area of damage was higher (p=0.005) nasally (2.95±4.52mm2) than temporally (2.19±4.17mm2). The area of UV damage was not related to age (r=0.03, p=0.674), gender (p=0.194), self-reported sun exposure lifestyle (p>0.05), geographical location (p=0174), sunglasses use (p>0.05) or UV-blocking contact lens use (p>0.05), although it was higher in those wearing contact lenses with minimal UV-blocking and no spectacles (p=0.015). The area of UV damage was also less nasally in those who wore contact lenses and spectacles compared to those with no refractive correction use (p=0.011 nasal; p=0.958 temporal). Conclusion: UV conjunctival damage is common even in Europe, Kuwait and UAE, and among ECPs. The area of damage appears to be linked with the use of refractive correction, with greater damage nasally than temporally which may be explained by the peripheral light focusing effect.

Editorial

This time of year we look back at the year that has passed and make plans for the next year. I like to reflect on things that I have learnt and people that I have met, especially those who facilitated that learning. In 2009 I went to various conferences, The BCLA conference in Manchester, The Romanian Optical Society meeting in Brasov, Transylvania (where the university is actually on Vlad Tepes Street), The European Council for Optometry and Optics (ECOO) in Brno, Czech Republic, The American Academy of Optometry (AAO) in Orlando USA, The International Association of Contact Lens Educators (IACLE) meeting in Tianjin China and finally The Vereinigung Deutscher Contactlinsen-Spezialisten (VDCO) meeting in Jena. All were interesting places and thoroughly all were enjoyable conferences with their own highlights but I wanted to focus on Jena and one person I met there and his inspirational search for knowledge and the contributions he made in the field of contact lenses. Jena itself is a fascinating place and should be on the ‘must visit’ list of anyone involved in eye care. It is the birth place of Carl Zeiss of course and where he started his company. It is also the birth place of Ernst Abbe (physicist and optometrist and expert lens maker), and Otto Schott (chemist and technologist who made high quality glass. There are many road signs bearing witness to these famous pioneers. The optical museum is worth spending a few hours looking around too. I was invited to speak at the VDCO at the kind invitation from colleagues at the Jena School of Optometry, Professor Wolfgang Sickenberger and Professor Sebastian Marx. At this meeting I met 87-year-old Willi KAUE who was being awarded the Adolf Wilhelm Müller-Welt prize by the VDCO for contribution to contact lenses over his 60-year career. At the age of 15 Willi Kaue took up an apprenticeship to become an Optician in Germany in 1937. At this time he first heard about the scleral glass lenses made by the Carl Zeiss Company in Jena. This started his lifelong fascination which was to become his passion but not yet his career. During the war he was enlisted into military service but immediately after was back to his former career. In 1950 Willi corrected his own 3.5 dioptres of myopia with a plastic scleral lens. His fascination strengthened as for the first time he himself could experience a wider field of view than his spectacles gave him, less aberrations and less retinal minification. He also appreciated the fact that contact lenses did not cause pressure on the nose or ears and did not slide down his nose plus remained optically centred with his eye movements. He decided that form now on he would make fitting contact lenses his career. He travelled to London to learn more about contact lenses and how to fit them but initially did not find many willing teachers and to start with became largely self-taught. He wanted to know how to make scleral lenses. So far he only knew that pulverized polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) was pressed and moulded. In 1951 he met Berlin optician Otto Marzock. He made his only scleral lenses from using military PMMA windshields. His process involved lathe cutting the lenses and resulted in lenses that were thinner than moulded ones. Willi developed a manufacturing method, using a rotary diamond drill, starting form the outer edge and towards the centre at a constant cut speed. This enabled him to make more reproducible lenses and in less time. His enthusiasm in the field was clear from the travels he made in the pursuit of advancement - travelling around Europe, South America, North America and Asia. In 1963 he visited George Nissel in Hemel Hempstead, England. Constantly thriving towards innovations Willi came across the new Naturalens from the USA made from HEMA at a congress in Marseille in 1969. Amongst his contributions to the field, was his own technique of fitting ocular prosthetics, using an alginate impression of the orbit. I was fortunate enough to have dinner with Willi Kaue and learnt more about his fascinating career through the patient interpreting skills of Hilmar Bussacker (the 2008 winner of the same award and the 2007 winner of the European Federation of the Contact Lens and IOL Industries Award). I look forward to 2010 with eager anticipation as to what I may learn and who I might meet!!! Copyright © 2009 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Changes at the BCLA

As we welcome 2014 we say goodbye to 2013 and I must start with an apology to authors who have submitted papers to CLAE and seen a delay in either the review process or the hard copy publication of their proofed article. The delays were caused by a major hike in the number of submissions to the journal in 2012 that increased further in 2013. In the 12 months leading to the end of October 2011 we had 94 new paper submissions, and for the same period to the end of 2012 the journal had 116 new papers. In 2012 we were awarded an impact factor for the first time and following that the next 12 month period to the end of October 2013 saw a massive increase in submissions with 171 new manuscripts being submitted. This is nearly twice as many papers as 2 years ago and 3 times as many as when I took over as Editor-in-Chief. In addition to this the UK academics will know that 2014 is a REF year (Research Excellence Framework) where universities are judged on their research and one of the major components of this measure remains to be published papers so there is a push to publishing before the REF deadline for counting. The rejection rate at CLAE has gone up too and currently is around 50% (more than double the rejection rate when I took over as Editor-in-Chief). At CLAE the number of pages that we publish each year has remained the same since 2007. When compiling issue 1 for 2014 I chose the papers to be included from the papers that were proofed and ready to go and there were around 200 proofed pages ready, which is enough to fill 3½ issues! At present Elsevier and the BCLA are preparing to increase the number the pages published per issue so that we can clear some of this backlog and remain up to date with the papers published in CLAE. I should add that on line publishing of papers is still available and there may have been review delays but there are no publishing online so authors can still get an epub on line final version of their paper with a DOI (digital object identifier) number enabling the paper to be cited. There are two awards that were made in 2013 that I would like to make special mention of. One was for my good friend Jan Bergmanson, who was awarded an honorary life fellowship of the College of Optometrists. Jan has served on the editorial board of CLAE for many years and in 2013 also celebrated 30 years of his annual ‘Texan Corneal and contact lens meeting’. The other award I wish to mention is Judith Morris, who was the BCLA Gold Medal Award winner in 2013. Judith has had many roles in her career and worked at Moorfields Eye Hospital, the Institute of Optometry and currently at City University. She has been the Europe Middle East and Africa President of IACLE (International Association of Contact Lens Educators) for many years and I think I am correct in saying that Judith is the only person who was President of both the BCLA (1983) and a few years later she was the President College of Optometrists (1989). Judith was also instrumental in introducing Vivien Freeman to the BCLA as they had been friends and Judith suggested that Vivien apply for an administrative job at the BCLA. Fast forward 29 years and in December 2013 Vivien stepped down as Secretary General of the BCLA. I would like to offer my own personal thanks to Vivien for her support of CLAE and of me over the years. The BCLA will not be the same and I wish you well in your future plans. But 2014 brings in a new position to the BCLA – Cheryl Donnelly has been given the new role of Chief Executive Officer. Cheryl was President of the BCLA in 2000 and has previously served on council. I look forward to working with Cheryl and envisage a bright future for the BCLA and CLAE. In this issue we have some great papers including some from authors who have not published with CLAE before. There is a nice paper on contact lens compliance in Nepal which brings home some familiar messages from an emerging market. A paper on how corneal curvature is affected by the use of hydrogel lenses is useful when advising patients how long they should leave their contact lenses out for to avoid seeing changes in refraction or curvature. This is useful information when refracting these patients or pre-laser surgery. There is a useful paper offering tips on fitting bitoric gas permeable lenses post corneal graft and a paper detailing surgery to implant piggyback multifocal intraocular lenses. One fact that I noted from the selection of papers in the current issue is where they were from. In this issue none of the corresponding authors are from the United Kingdom. There are two papers each from the United States, Spain and Iran, and one each from the Netherlands, Ireland, Republic of Korea, Australia and Hong Kong. This is an obvious reflection of the widening interest in CLAE and the BCLA and indicates the new research groups emerging in the field.

Repeatability of ocular aberration measurements in patients with keratoconus

Purpose: To explore the repeatability of lower-order and higher-order ocular aberrations measured in patients with keratoconus. Methods: The IRX-3 (Imagine Eyes, Paris, France) aberrometer was used to record lower-order and higher-order aberrations in 31 eyes of 31 patients with keratoconus. Four monocular measurements were taken consecutively for each patient. The aberrometry data were analysed up to the 5th Zernike order for a 4-mm pupil diameter. The data were evaluated using repeated-measures anova and Friedman analyses. Repeatability was analysed using within-subject standard deviation (SW) and the repeatability limit (r) calculated as 1.96 ×√2×Sw. Results: Of the 11 aberration terms evaluated, the repeatability of Z (2,0) (mean= 1.36μm; SW=0.09μm; r=0.26μm); Z (2,±2) RMS (mean=1.05μm; SW= 0.09μm; r=0.24μm) and Z (4,0) aberrations (mean=0.34μm; SW=0.09 μm; r=0.24μm) showed the highest variability. In contrast, Z (3,±1) RMS aberrations (mean=0.85μm; SW=0.06μm; r=0.16μm) and Z (4,±2) RMS aberrations (mean=0.40μm; SW=0.07μm; r=0.18μm) showed comparatively better repeatability. Conclusions: The lower-order and higher-order aberrations measured in this group of keratoconic patients showed higher levels of variability compared to previous investigations of visually-normal subjects. These results may be of interest to eyecare practitioners involved in the design and fitting of aberration-controlling contact lenses for patients with keratoconus. © 2011 The College of Optometrists.

Do educators need educating?

Actual text: I was recently at the Spanish College of Optometry biennial conference and attended a meeting of contact lens lecturers from around Spain and Portugal. We discussed various ideas, mainly about how to share good practice and improve standards. What came to my mind was ‘is there a blueprint for training trainers?’ Well probably not but there are many things that we need to acknowledge such as the way students learn for example. Many educators themselves were taught by lecturers who would write on a blackboard or use acetate on an overhead projector, then came the 35 mm slide era followed by the Powerpoint era. More recently there is a move towards a much more integrated approach of various teaching methods. At my university our contact lens and anterior eye lectures generally follow a format where a narrated Powerpoint lecture is uploaded onto our internal virtual learning environment. This narrated version of the slides is designed to give the didactic element of the topic. The students listen to that before attending an interactive seminar on that topic. The seminar is also recorded so that students can listen to that afterwards. The seminar is designed to give additional information, such as case reports, or to clarify key points or for live demonstrations. It is a good way of doubling the contact time with the students without imposing further on an already packed formal timetable as the students can work in their own time. One problem that we noticed with this approach was that attendance can vary. If the students feel that they will gain something from the interactive seminar then they are more likely to attend – exam tips usually win them over! At the Spanish meeting the educators decided that they wanted to have regular meetings. The industry colleagues in attendance said that they were happy to help but could not necessarily give money, but they could offer meeting rooms, pay for lunch and evening meals. They even said that that they were happy to host meetings and invite other companies too (except to manufacturing plants). In the UK the British Committee of Contact Lens Educators (BUCCLE) meets for one day on three occasions in the year. The American Optometric Contact Lens Educators (AOCLE) meets annually at a three day event. Both these organisations get some help from industry. BUCCLE usually has one of its meetings at a university, one at a company training centre/manufacturing plant/national headquarters and one meeting the day before the BCLA annual conference. BUCCLE usually has its pre-BCLA meeting in conjunction with the International Association of Contact Lens Educators (IACLE). So when educators meet what would they discuss; well probably the focus should be on education rather than actual contact lens knowledge. For example sharing ideas on how to teach toric lens fitting would be better than discussing the actual topic of toric lenses itself. Most universities will have an education department with an expert who could share ideas on how to use the internet in teaching or how to structure lectures or assessments etc. In the past I have helped with similar training programmes in other countries and sharing good practice in pedagogy is always a popular topic. Anyone who is involved in education in the field of contact lenses should look at the IACLE web page and look out for the IACLE World Congress in 2015 in the days preceding the BCLA. Finally, IACLE, AOCLE and BUCCLE all exist as a result of generous educational grants from contact lens companies and anyone interested in finding out more about should refer to their respective web pages.

Biomaterial interactions with compromised tissue surfaces

This thesis is concerned with the nature of biomaterial interactions with compromised host tissue sites. Both ocular and dermal tissues can be wounded, following injury, disease or surgery, and consequently require the use of a biomaterial. Clear analogies exist between the cornea/tear film/contact lens and the dermal wound bed/wound fluid/skin adhesive wound dressing. The work described in this thesis builds upon established biochemistry to examine specific aspects of the interaction of biomaterials with compromised ocular and dermal tissue sites, with a particular focus on the role of vitronectin. Vitronectin is a prominent cell adhesion glycoprotein present in both tear fluid and wound fluid, and has a role in the regulation and upregulation of plasmin. The interaction of contact lenses with the cornea was assessed by a novel on-lens cell-based vitronectin assay technique. Vitronectin mapping showed that vitronectin-mediated cell adhesion to contact lens surfaces was due to the contact lens-corneal mechanical interaction rather than deposition out of the tear film. This deposition is associated predominantly with the peripheral region of the posterior contact lens surface. The locus of vitronectin deposition on the contact lens surface, which is affected by material modulus, is potentially an important factor in the generation of plasmin in the posterior tear film. Use of the vitronectin mapping technique on ex vivo bandage contact lenses revealed greater vitronectin-mediated cell adhesion to the contact lens surfaces in comparison to lenses worn in the healthy eye. The results suggest that vitronectin is more readily deposited from the impaired corneal tissue bed than the intact healthy tissue bed. Significantly, subjects with a deficient tear film were found to deposit high vitronectin-mediated cell adhesion levels to the BCL surface, thus highlighting the influence of the contact lens-tissue interaction upon deposition. Biomimetic principles imply that adhesive materials for wound applications, including hydrogels and hydrocolloids, should closely match the surface energy parameters of skin. The surface properties of hydrocolloid adhesives were found to be easily modified by contact with siliconised plastic release liners. In contrast, paper release liners did not significantly affect the adhesive surface properties. In order to characterise such materials in the actual wound environment, which is an extremely challenging task, preliminary considerations for the design of an artificial wound fluid model from an animal serum base were addressed.

International session at the BCLA conference

Full text: It seems a long time ago now since we were at the BCLA conference. The excellent FIFA World Cup in Brazil kept us occupied over the summer as well as Formula 1, Wimbledon, Tour de France, Commonwealth Games and of course exam paper marking! The BCLA conference this year was held in Birmingham at the International Convention Centre which again proved to be a great venue. The number of attendees overall was up on previous years, and at a record high of 1500 people. Amongst the highlights at this year's annual conference was the live surgery link where Professor Sunil Shah demonstrated the differences in technique between traditional phacoemulsification cataract surgery and femtosecond assisted phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Dr. Raquel Gil Cazorla, a research optometrist at Aston University, assisted in the procedure including calibrating the femtosecond laser. Another highlight for me was the session that I chaired, which was the international session organised by IACLE (International Association of CL Educators). There was a talk by Mirjam van Tilborg about dry eye prevalence in the Netherlands and how it was managed by medical general practitioners (GPs) or optometrists. It was interesting to know that there are only 2 schools of optometry there and currently under 1000 registered optometrists there. It also seems that GPs were more likely to blame CL as the cause for dry eye whereas optometrists who had a fuller range of tests were better at solving the issue. The next part of the session included the presentation of 5 selected posters from around the world. The posters were also displayed in the main poster area but were selected to be presented here as they had international relevance. The posters were: 1. Motivators and Barriers for Contact Lens Recommendation and Wear by Nilesh Thite (India) 2. Contact lens hygiene among Saudi wearers by Dr. Ali Masmaly (Saudi) 3. Trends of contact lens prescribing and patterns of contact lens practice in Jordan by Dr. Mera Haddad (Jordan) 4. Contact Lens Behaviour in Greece by Dr. Dimitra Makrynioti (Greece) 5. How practitioners inform ametropes about the benefits of contact lenses and overcome the potential barriers: an Italian survey, by Dr. Fabrizio Zeri (Italy) It was interesting to learn about CL practice in different parts, for example the CL wearing population ration in Saudi Arabia is around 1:2 Male:Female (similar to other parts of the world) and although the sale of CL is restricted to registered practitioners there are many unregistered outlets, like clothing stores, that flout the rules. In Jordan some older practitioners will still advise patients to use tap water or even saliva! But thankfully the newer generation of practitioners have been educated not to advise this. In Greece one of the concerns was that some practitioners may advise patients to use disposable lenses for longer than they should and again it seems to be the practitioners with inadequate education that would do this. In India it was found that cost was one barrier to using contact lenses but also some practitioners felt that they shouldn’t offer CLs due to cost too. In Italy sensitive eyes and CL care and maintenance were the barriers to CL wear but the motivators were vision and comfort and aesthetics. Finally the international session ended with the IACLE travel award and educator awards presented by IACLE president Shehzad Naroo and BCLA President Andrew Yorke. The travel award went to Wang Ling, Jinling Institute of Technology, Nanjing, China. There were 3 regional Contact Lens Educator of the Year Awards sponsored by Coopervision and presented by Dr. J.C. Aragorn of Coopervision. 1. Asia Pacific Region – Dr. Rajeswari Mahadevan of Sankara Nethralaya Medical Research Foundation, Chennai, India 2. Americas Region – Dr. Sergio Garcia of University of La Salle, Bogotá and the University Santo Tomás, Bucaramanga, Colombia 3. Europe/Africa – Middle East Region: Dr. Eef van der Worp, affiliated with the University of Maastricht, the Netherlands The posters above were just a small selection of those displayed at this year's BCLA conference. If you missed the BCLA conference then you can see the abstracts for all posters and talks in a virtual issue of CLAE very soon. The poster competition was kindly sponsored by Elsevier. The poster winner this year was: Joan Gispets – Corneal and Anterior Chamber Parameters in Keratoconus The 3 runners up were: Debby Yeung – Scleral Lens Central Corneal Clearance Assessment with Biomicroscopy Sarah L. Smith – Subjective Grading of Lid Margin Staining Heiko Pult – Impact of Soft Contact Lenses on Lid Parallel Conjunctival Folds My final two highlights are a little more personal. Firstly, I was awarded Honorary Life Fellowship of the BCLA for my work with the Journal, and I would like to thank the BCLA, Elsevier, the editorial board of CLAE, the reviewers and the authors for their support of my role. My final highlight from the BCLA conference this year was the final presentation of the conference – the BCLA Gold Medal award. The recipient this year was Professor Philip Morgan with his talk ‘Changing the world with contact lenses’. Phil was the person who advised me to go to my first BCLA conference in 1994 (funnily he didn’t attend himself as he was busy getting married!) and now 20 years later he was being honoured with the accolade of being the BCLA Gold Medallist. The date of his BCLA medal addressed was shared with his father's birthday so a double celebration for Phil. Well done to outgoing BCLA President Andy Yorke and his team at the BCLA (including Nick Rumney, Cheryl Donnelly, Sarah Greenwood and Amir Khan) on an excellent conference. And finally welcome to new President Susan Bowers. Copyright © 2014 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Is pupil diameter influenced by refractive error?

Purpose: To investigate the relationship between pupil diameter and refractive error and how refractive correction, target luminance, and accommodation modulate this relationship. Methods: Sixty emmetropic, myopic, and hyperopic subjects (age range, 18 to 35 years) viewed an illuminated target (luminance: 10, 100, 200, 400, 1000, 2000, and 4100 cd/m2) within a Badal optical system, at 0 diopters (D) and −3 D vergence, with and without refractive correction. Refractive error was corrected using daily disposable contact lenses. Pupil diameter and accommodation were recorded continuously using a commercially available photorefractor. Results: No significant difference in pupil diameter was found between the refractive groups at 0 D or −3 D target vergence, in the corrected or uncorrected conditions. As expected, pupil diameter decreased with increasing luminance. Target vergence had no significant influence on pupil diameter. In the corrected condition, at 0 D target vergence, the accommodation response was similar in all refractive groups. At −3 D target vergence, the emmetropic and myopic groups accommodated significantly more than the hyperopic group at all luminance levels. There was no correlation between accommodation response and pupil diameter or refractive error in any refractive group. In the uncorrected condition, the accommodation response was significantly greater in the hyperopic group than in the myopic group at all luminance levels, particularly for near viewing. In the hyperopic group, the accommodation response was significantly correlated with refractive error but not pupil diameter. In the myopic group, accommodation response level was not correlated with refractive error or pupil diameter. Conclusions: Refractive error has no influence on pupil diameter, irrespective of refractive correction or accommodative demand. This suggests that the pupil is controlled by the pupillary light reflex and is not driven by retinal blur.

The influence of simulated cataract on retinal vessel oximetry measurements

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of human crystalline lens opacification and yellowing, similar to that observed in patients with cataracts, on retinal vessel blood oxygen saturation measurements using custom manufactured soft contact lenses. METHODS: Ten healthy, non-smoking individuals were enrolled for this study. All subjects underwent digital blood pressure measurements, assessment of non-contact intra-ocular pressure, pupil dilation and retinal vessel oximetry using dual-wavelength photography (Oximetry Module, Imedos Systems). To simulate lens changes, three different contact lenses were inserted, one to simulate opacities followed by two more lenses to simulate different levels of lens yellowing (Cantor & Nissel). RESULTS: The measurements obtained showed an opposite change in arterial and venous oxygen saturation and optical density ratio across conditions, resulting in a statistically significant difference in arterial minus venous oxygen saturation value (p = 0.003). However, this difference was only significant for the 'opacity' condition but not for the 'yellowing' conditions. CONCLUSION: Lenticular changes such as cataracts can impact on spectrophotometric analysis in particular dual-wavelength retinal vessel oximetry. Hence, lenticular assessment and cataract grading should be considered when assessing elderly individuals and patient groups developing cataract earlier in life such as those suffering from diabetes mellitus.

The effects of entrance pupil centration and coma aberrations on myopic progression following orthokeratology

Background: The aim was to assess the potential association between entrance pupil location relative to the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex (CSCLR) and the progression of myopia in children fitted with orthokeratology (OK) contact lenses. Additionally, whether coma aberration induced by decentration of the entrance pupil centre relative to the CSCLR, as well as following OK treatment, is correlated with the progression of myopia, was also investigated. Methods: Twenty-nine subjects aged six to 12years and with myopia of -0.75 to -4.00 DS and astigmatism up to 1.00DC were fitted with OK contact lenses. Measurements of axial length and corneal topography were taken at six-month intervals over a two-year period. Additionally, baseline and three-month topographic outputs were taken as representative of the pre- and post-orthokeratology treatment status. Pupil centration relative to the CSCLR and magnitude of associated corneal coma were derived from corneal topographic data at baseline and after three months of lens wear. Results: The centre of the entrance pupil was located superio-temporally to the CSCLR both pre- (0.09±0.14 and -0.10±0.15mm, respectively) and post-orthokeratology (0.12±0.18 and -0.09±0.15mm, respectively) (p>0.05). Entrance pupil location pre- and post-orthokeratology lens wear was not significantly associated with the two-year change in axial length (p>0.05). Significantly greater coma was found at the entrance pupil centre compared with CSCLR both pre- and post-orthokeratology lens wear (both p<0.05). A significant increase in vertical coma was found with OK lens wear compared to baseline (p<0.001) but total root mean square (RMS) coma was not associated with the change in axial length (all p>0.05). Conclusion: Entrance pupil location relative to the CSCLR was not significantly affected by either OK lens wear or an increase in axial length. Greater magnitude coma aberrations found at the entrance pupil centre in comparison to the CSCLR might be attributed to centration of orthokeratological treatments at the CSCLR.