Comparison of near visual acuity and reading metrics in presbyopia correction

PURPOSE: To provide a consistent standard for the evaluation of different types of presbyopic correction. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Presbyopic corrections examined were accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs), simultaneous multifocal and monovision contact lenses, and varifocal spectacles. Binocular near visual acuity measured with different optotypes (uppercase letters, lowercase letters, and words) and reading metrics assessed with the Minnesota Near Reading chart (reading acuity, critical print size [CPS], CPS reading speed) were intercorrelated (Pearson product moment correlations) and assessed for concordance (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) and agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) for indication of clinical usefulness. RESULTS: Nineteen accommodating IOL cases, 40 simultaneous contact lens cases, and 38 varifocal spectacle cases were evaluated. Other than CPS reading speed, all near visual acuity and reading metrics correlated well with each other (r>0.70, P<.001). Near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters was highly concordant (ICC, 0.78) and in close agreement with lowercase letters (+/- 0.17 logMAR). Near word acuity agreed well with reading acuity (+/- 0.16 logMAR), which in turn agreed well with near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters 0.16 logMAR). Concordance (ICC, 0.18 to 0.46) and agreement (+/- 0.24 to 0.30 logMAR) of CPS with the other near metrics was moderate. CONCLUSION: Measurement of near visual ability in presbyopia should be standardized to include assessment of near visual acuity with logMAR uppercase-letter optotypes, smallest logMAR print size that maintains maximum reading speed (CPS), and reading speed. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35:1401-1409 (C) 2009 ASCRS and ESCRS

Operator-induced errors in Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensing:model eye study

Purpose: To evaluate the effects of instrument realignment and angular misalignment during the clinical determination of wavefront aberrations by simulation in model eyes. Setting: Aston Academy of Life Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Methods: Six model eyes were examined with wavefront-aberration-supported cornea ablation (WASCA) (Carl Zeiss Meditec) in 4 sessions of 10 measurements each: sessions 1 and 2, consecutive repeated measures without realignment; session 3, realignment of the instrument between readings; session 4, measurements without realignment but with the model eye shifted 6 degrees angularly. Intersession repeatability and the effects of realignment and misalignment were obtained by comparing the measurements in the various sessions for coma, spherical aberration, and higher-order aberrations (HOAs). Results: The mean differences between the 2 sessions without realignment of the instrument were 0.020 μm ± 0.076 (SD) for Z3 - 1(P = .551), 0.009 ± 0.139 μm for Z3 1(P = .877), 0.004 ± 0.037 μm for Z4 0 (P = .820), and 0.005 ± 0.01 μm for HO root mean square (RMS) (P = .301). Differences between the nonrealigned and realigned instruments were -0.017 ± 0.026 μm for Z3 - 1(P = .159), 0.009 ± 0.028 μm for Z3 1 (P = .475), 0.007 ± 0.014 μm for Z4 0(P = .296), and 0.002 ± 0.007 μm for HO RMS (P = 0.529; differences between centered and misaligned instruments were -0.355 ± 0.149 μm for Z3 - 1 (P = .002), 0.007 ± 0.034 μm for Z3 1(P = .620), -0.005 ± 0.081 μm for Z4 0(P = .885), and 0.012 ± 0.020 μm for HO RMS (P = .195). Realignment increased the standard deviation by a factor of 3 compared with the first session without realignment. Conclusions: Repeatability of the WASCA was excellent in all situations tested. Realignment substantially increased the variance of the measurements. Angular misalignment can result in significant errors, particularly in the determination of coma. These findings are important when assessing highly aberrated eyes during follow-up or before surgery. © 2007 ASCRS and ESCRS.

Optimizing measurement of subjective amplitude of accommodation with defocus curves

PURPOSE: To determine whether letter sequences and/or lens-presentation order should be randomized when measuring defocus curves and to assess the most appropriate criterion for calculating the subjective amplitude of accommodation (AoA) from defocus curves. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Defocus curves (from +3.00 diopters [D] to -3.00 D in 0.50 D steps) for 6 possible combinations of randomized or nonrandomized letter sequences and/or lens-presentation order were measured in a random order in 20 presbyopic subjects. Subjective AoA was calculated from the defocus curves by curve fitting using various published criteria, and each was correlated to subjective push-up AoA. Objective AoA was measured for comparison of blur tolerance and pupil size. RESULTS: Randomization of lens-presentation order and/or letter sequences, or lack of, did not affect the measured defocus curves (P>.05, analysis of variance). The range of defocus that maintains highest achievable visual acuity (allowing for variability of repeated measurement) was better correlated to (r = 0.84) and agreed best with ( 0.50 D) subjective push-up AoA than any other relative or absolute acuity criterion used in previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Nonrandomized letters and lens presentation on their own did not affect subjective AoA measured by defocus curves, although their combination should be avoided. Quantification of subjective AoA from defocus curves should be standardized to the range of defocus that maintains the best achievable visual acuity.

Objective analysis of toric intraocular lens rotation and centration

PURPOSE: To assess the repeatability of an objective image analysis technique to determine intraocular lens (IOL) rotation and centration. SETTING: Six ophthalmology clinics across Europe. METHODS: One-hundred seven patients implanted with Akreos AO aspheric IOLs with orientation marks were imaged. Image quality was rated by a masked observer. The axis of rotation was determined from a line bisecting the IOL orientation marks. This was normalized for rotation of the eye between visits using the axis bisecting 2 consistent conjunctival vessels or iris features. The center of ovals overlaid to circumscribe the IOL optic edge and the pupil or limbus were compared to determine IOL centration. Intrasession repeatability was assessed in 40 eyes and the variability of repeated analysis examined. RESULTS: Intrasession rotational stability of the IOL was ±0.79 degrees (SD) and centration was ±0.10 mm horizontally and ±0.10 mm vertically. Repeated analysis variability of the same image was ±0.70 degrees for rotation and ±0.20 mm horizontally and ±0.31 mm vertically for centration. Eye rotation (absolute) between visits was 2.23 ± 1.84 degrees (10%>5 degrees rotation) using one set of consistent conjunctival vessels or iris features and 2.03 ± 1.66 degrees (7%>5 degrees rotation) using the average of 2 sets (P =.13). Poorer image quality resulted in larger apparent absolute IOL rotation (r =-0.45,P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Objective analysis of digital retroillumination images allows sensitive assessment of IOL rotation and centration stability. Eye rotation between images can lead to significant errors if not taken into account. Image quality is important to analysis accuracy.

Mechanism of action of the tetraflex accommodative intraocular lens

PURPOSE:To investigate the mechanism of action of the Tetraflex (Lenstec Kellen KH-3500) accommodative intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS:Thirteen eyes of eight patients implanted with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL for at least 2 years underwent assessment of their objective amplitude-of-accommodation by autorefraction, anterior chamber depth and pupil size with optical coherence tomography, and IOL flexure with aberrometry, each viewing a target at 0.0 to 4.00 diopters of accommodative demand. RESULTS:Pupil size decreased by 0.62+/-0.41 mm on increasing accommodative demand, but the Tetraflex IOL was relatively fixed in position within the eye. The ocular aberrations of the eye changed with increased accommodative demand, but not in a consistent manner among individuals. Those aberrations that appeared to be most affected were defocus, vertical primary and secondary astigmatism, vertical coma, horizontal and vertical primary and secondary trefoil, and spherical aberration. CONCLUSIONS:Some of the reported near vision benefits of the Tetraflex accommodating IOL appear to be due to changes in the optical aberrations because of the flexure of the IOL on accommodative effort rather than forward movement within the capsular bag.

Rotational and centration stability of an aspheric intraocular lens with a simulated toric design

Purpose: To assess the stability of the Akreos AO intraocular lens (IOL) platform with a simulated toric design using objective image analysis. Setting: Six hospital eye clinics across Europe. Methods: After implantation in 1 eye of patients, IOLs with orientation marks were imaged at 1 to 2 days, 7 to 14 days, 30 to 60 days, and 120 to 180 days. The axis of rotation and IOL centration were objectively assessed using validated image analysis. Results: The study enrolled 107 patients with a mean age of 69.9 years ± 7.7 (SD). The image quality was sufficient for IOL rotation analysis in 91% of eyes. The mean rotation between the first day postoperatively and 120 to 180 days was 1.93 ± 2.33 degrees, with 96% of IOLs rotating fewer than 5 degrees and 99% rotating fewer than 10 degrees. There was no significant rotation between visits and no clear bias in the direction of rotation. In 71% of eyes, the dilation and image quality was sufficient for image analysis of centration. The mean change in centration between 1 day and 120 to 180 days was 0.21 ± 0.11 mm, with all IOLs decentering less than 0.5 mm. There was no significant decentration between visits and no clear bias in the direction of the decentration. Conclusion: Objective analysis of digital retroillumination images taken at different postoperative periods shows the aspheric IOL platform was stable in the eye and is therefore suitable for the application of a toric surface to correct corneal astigmatism.

Tablet App halometer for the assessment of dysphotopsia

Purpose To assess the validity and repeatability of the Aston Halometer. Setting University clinic, United Kingdom. Design Prospective, repeated-measures experimental study. Methods The halometer comprises a bright light-emitting-diode (LED) glare source in the center of an iPad4. Letters subtending 0.21° (∼0.3 logMAR) were moved centrifugally from the LED in 0.05 degree steps in 8 orientations separated by 45 degrees for each of 4 contrast levels (1000, 500, 100, and 25 Weber contrast units [Cw]) in random order. Bangerter occlusion foils were inserted in front of the right eye to simulate monocular glare conditions in 20 subjects (mean age 27.7 ± 3.1 years). Subjects were positioned 2 meters from the screen in a dark room with the iPad controlled from an iPhone via Bluetooth operated by the researcher. The C-Quant straylight meter was also used with each of the foils to measure the level of straylight over the retina. Halometry and straylight repeatability was assessed at a second visit. Results Halo size increased with the different occlusion foils and target contrasts (F = 29.564, P <.001) as expected and in a pattern similar to straylight measures (F = 80.655, P <0.001). Lower contrast letters showed better sensitivity but larger glare-obscured areas, resulting in ceiling effects caused by the screen's field-of-view, with 500 Cw being the best compromise. Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of the Aston Halometer was good (500Cw: 0.84 to 0.93 and 0.53 to 0.73) and similar to the straylight meter. Conclusion The halometer provides a sensitive, repeatable way of quantifying a patient-recognized form of disability glare in multiple orientations to add objectivity to subjectively reported discomfort glare.

Visual outcomes and subjective experience after bilateral implantation of a new diffractive trifocal intraocular lens

Purpose - To assess clinical outcomes and subjective experience after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Setting - Midland Eye Institute, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design - Cohort study. Methods - Patients had bilateral implantation of Finevision trifocal IOLs. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction were measured 2 months postoperatively. Defocus curves were assessed under photopic and mesopic conditions over a range of +1.50 to -4.00 diopters (D) in 0.50 D steps. Contrast sensitivity function was assessed under photopic conditions. Halometry was used to measure the angular size of monocular and binocular photopic scotomas arising from a glare source. Patient satisfaction with uncorrected near vision was assessed using the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ). Results - The mean monocular CDVA was 0.08 logMAR ± 0.08 (SD) and the mean binocular CDVA, 0.06 ± 0.08 logMAR. Defocus curve testing showed an extended range of clear vision from +1.00 to -2.50 D defocus, with a significant difference in acuity between photopic conditions and mesopic conditions at -1.50 D defocus only. Photopic contrast sensitivity was significantly better binocularly than monocularly at all spatial frequencies. Halometry showed a glare scotoma of a mean size similar to that in previous studies of multifocal and accommodating IOLs; there were no subjective complaints of dysphotopsia. The mean NAVQ Rasch score for satisfaction with near vision was 15.9 ± 10.7 logits. Conclusions - The trifocal IOL implanted binocularly produced good distance visual acuity and near and intermediate visual function. Patients were very satisfied with their uncorrected near vision.

Design and validity of a miniaturized open-field aberrometer

PURPOSE: To validate a new miniaturised, open-field wavefront device which has been developed with the capacity to be attached to an ophthalmic surgical microscope or slit-lamp. SETTING: Solihull Hospital and Aston University, Birmingham, UK DESIGN: Comparative non-interventional study. METHODS: The dynamic range of the Aston Aberrometer was assessed using a calibrated model eye. The validity of the Aston Aberrometer was compared to a conventional desk mounted Shack-Hartmann aberrometer (Topcon KR1W) by measuring the refractive error and higher order aberrations of 75 dilated eyes with both instruments in random order. The Aston Aberrometer measurements were repeated five times to assess intra-session repeatability. Data was converted to vector form for analysis. RESULTS: The Aston Aberrometer had a large dynamic range of at least +21.0 D to -25.0 D. It gave similar measurements to a conventional aberrometer for mean spherical equivalent (mean difference ± 95% confidence interval: 0.02 ± 0.49D; correlation: r=0.995, p<0.001), astigmatic components (J0: 0.02 ± 0.15D; r=0.977, p<0.001; J45: 0.03 ± 0.28; r=0.666, p<0.001) and higher order aberrations RMS (0.02 ± 0.20D; r=0.620, p<0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient assessments of intra-sessional repeatability for the Aston Aberrometer were excellent (spherical equivalent =1.000, p<0.001; astigmatic components J0 =0.998, p<0.001, J45=0.980, p<0.01; higher order aberrations RMS =0.961, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Aston Aberrometer gives valid and repeatable measures of refractive error and higher order aberrations over a large range. As it is able to measure continuously, it can provide direct feedback to surgeons during intraocular lens implantations and corneal surgery as to the optical status of the visual system.

Specialist contact lens fitting

What is meant by the term ‘specialist contact lens fitting’? Or put another way, what would be considered non-specialist contact lens fitting? Is there such a thing as routine contact lens fitting? Soft or silicone hydrogel fitting for daily wear would probably be considered as routine contact lens fitting, but would extended or flexible wear remain in the same category or would they be considered a specialist fit? Different eras will classify different products as being ‘specialist’. Certainly twenty years ago soft toric contact lenses were considered as being speciality lenses but today would be thought of as routine lenses. Conversely, gas permeable lenses were thought of as mainstream twenty years ago but now are considered as speciality lenses. Although this would not be the same globally, as in some countries (such as Netherlands, France and Japan) gas permeable lens fitting remains popular and is not on the decline as in other countries (Canada, Australia and Sweden) [1]. Bandage soft lenses applied after surface laser refractive procedures would be considered as therapeutic lenses but in reality they are just plano thin hydrogel lenses worn constantly for 3–4 days to allow the underlying epithelium to convalesce and are then removed [2]. Some patients find that wearing hydrogel lenses during periods when they suffer from seasonal allergies actually improves their ocular comfort as the contact lens acts as a barrier to the allergen [3] and [4]. Scleral lenses have long been considered speciality lenses, apart from a time when they were the only lenses available but at that time all contact lens work would have been considered speciality practice! Nowadays we see the advent of mini-scleral designs and we see large diameter gas permeable lenses too. It is possible that these lenses increase the popularity of gas permeable lenses again and they become more main stream. So it would seem that the lines between routine and speciality contact lens fitting are not clear. Whether a lens is classed a specialist fit or not would depend on the lens type, why it was fitted, where in the world the fitting was being done and even the era in which it was fitted. This begs the question as to what would be considered entry level knowledge in contact lens fitting. This may not be an issue for most BCLA members or CLAE readers but certainly would be for bodies such as the College of Optometrists (UK) or the Association of British Dispensing Opticians when they are planning the final registration examinations for budding practitioners or when planning the level of higher level qualifications such as College Certificates or Diplomas. Similarly for training institutions when they are planning their course content. This becomes even trickier when trying to devise a qualification that spans across many countries, like the European Diploma in Optometry and Optics. How do we know if the training and examination level is correct? One way would be to analyse things when they go wrong and if patterns of malpractice are seen then maybe that could be used as an indicator to more training being needed. There were 162 Fitness to Practice Hearing at the General Optical Council between 2001 and 2010. Forty-seven of these were clinically related case, 39 fraud related, and 76 others. Of the clinical ones only 3 were contact lens related. So it would appear that as whole, in the profession, contact lens clinical skills are not being questioned too often (although it seems a few of us can’t keep our hands out the cookie jar!).

Validity and repeatability of the Aladdin ocular biometer

Aim To assess the accuracy and reproducibility of biometry undertaken with the Aladdin (Topcon, Tokyo, Japan) in comparison with the current gold standard device, the IOLMaster 500 (Zeiss, Jena, Germany). Setting University Eye Clinic, Birmingham, UK and Refractive Surgery Centre, Kiel, Germany. Methods The right eye of 75 patients with cataracts and 22 healthy participants were assessed using the two devices. Measurements of axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and keratometry (K) were undertaken with the Aladdin and IOLMaster 500 in random order by an experienced practitioner. A second practitioner then obtained measurements for each participant using the Aladdin biometer in order to assess interobserver variability. Results No statistically significant differences ( p≥0.05) between the two biometers were found for average difference (AL)±95% CI=0.01±0.06 mm), ACD (0.00 ±0.11 mm) or mean K values (0.08±0.51 D). Furthermore, interobserver variability was very good for each parameter (weighted κ≥0.85). One patient's IOL powers could not be calculated with either biometer measurements, whereas a further three could not be analysed by the IOLMaster 500. The IOL power calculated from the valid measurements was not statistically significantly different between the biometers (p=0.842), with 91% of predictions within±0.25 D. Conclusions The Aladdin is a quick, easy-to-use biometer that produces valid and reproducible results that are comparable with those obtained with the IOLMaster 500.

Astigmatism and vision:should all astigmatism always be corrected?

As technology and medical devices improve, there is much interest in when and how astigmatism should be corrected with refractive surgery. Astigmatism can be corrected by most forms of refractive surgery, such as using excimer lasers algorithms to ablate the cornea to compensate for the magnitude of refractive error in different meridians. Correction of astigmatism at the time of cataract surgery is well developed and can be achieved through incision placement, relaxing incisions and toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. This was less of an issue in the past when there was a lower expectation to be spectacle independent after cataract surgery, in which case the residual refractive error, including astigmatism, could be compensated for with spectacle lenses. The issue of whether presurgical astigmatism should be corrected can be considered separately depending on whether a patient has residual accommodation, and the type of refractive surgery under consideration. We have previously reported on the visual impact of full correction of astigmatism, rather than just correcting the mean spherical equivalent. Correction of astigmatism as low as 1.00 dioptres significantly improves objective and subjective measures of functional vision in prepresbyopes at distance and near.

Corneal pachymetry in normal and keratoconic eyes:Orbscan II versus ultrasound

Purpose: To compare corneal thickness measurements using Orbscan II (OII) and ultrasonic (US) pachymetry in normal and in keratoconic eyes. Setting: Eye Department, Heartlands and Solihull NHS Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Methods: Central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured by means of OII and US pachymetry in 1 eye of 72 normal subjects and 36 keratoconus patients. The apical corneal thickness (ACT) in keratoconus patients was also evaluated using each method. The mean of the difference, standard deviation (SD), and 95% limits of agreement (LoA = mean ± 2 SD), with and without applying the default linear correction factor (LCF), were determined for each sample. The Student t test was used to identify significant differences between methods, and the correlation between methods was determined using the Pearson bivariate correlation. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to confirm that the results of the 2 instruments were clinically comparable. Results: In normal eyes, the mean difference (± 95% LoA) in CCT was 1.04 μm ± 68.52 (SD) (P>.05; r = 0.71) when the LCF was used and 46.73 ± 75.40 μm (P = .0001; r = 0.71) without the LCF. In keratoconus patients, the mean difference (± 95% LoA) in CCT between methods was 42.46 ± 66.56 μm (P<.0001: r = 0.85) with the LCF, and 2.51 ± 73.00 μm (P>.05: r = 0.85) without the LCF. The mean difference (± 95% LoA) in ACT for this group was 49.24 ± 60.88 μm (P<.0001: r = 0.89) with the LCF and 12.71 ± 68.14 μm (P = .0077; r = 0.89) when the LCF was not used. Conclusions: This study suggests that OII and US pachymetry provide similar readings for CCT in normal subjects when an LCF is used. In keratoconus patients, OII provides a valid clinical tool for the noninvasive assessment of CCT when the LCF is not applied. © 2004 ASCRS and ESCRS.

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/.

Ocular surface temperature:a review

Purpose. To review the evolution in ocular temperature measurement during the last century and examine the advantages and applications of the latest noncontact techniques. The characteristics and source of ocular surface temperature are also discussed. Methods. The literature was reviewed with regard to progress in human thermometry techniques, the parallel development in ocular temperature measurement, the current use of infrared imaging, and the applications of ocular thermography. Results. It is widely acknowledged that the ability to measure ocular temperature accurately will increase the understanding of ocular physiology. There is a characteristic thermal profile across the anterior eye, in which the central area appears coolest. Ocular surface temperature is affected by many factors, including inflammation. In thermometry of the human eye, contact techniques have largely been superseded by infrared imaging, providing a noninvasive and potentially more accurate method of temperature measurement. Ocular thermography requires high resolution and frame rate: features found in the latest generation of cameras. Applications have included dry eye, contact lens wear, corneal sensitivity, and refractive surgery. Conclusions. Interest in the temperature of the eye spans almost 130 years. It has been an area of research largely driven by prevailing technology. Current instrumentation offers the potential to measure ocular surface temperature with more accuracy, resolution, and speed than previously possible. The use of dynamic ocular thermography offers great opportunities for monitoring the temperature of the anterior eye. © 2005 Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc.