Does blue-violet filtering in contact lenses improve contrast sensitivity?

2021 ◽  
pp. 101558
Author(s):  
S. Tavazzi ◽  
E. Ponzini ◽  
A. Caridi ◽  
S. Secreti ◽  
F. Miglio ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Kirti Singh ◽  
Mainak Bhattacharyya ◽  
Abhishek Goel ◽  
Ritu Arora ◽  
Nikhil Gotmare ◽  
...  

Purpose: Literature is relatively silent on safety profile and predictability of orthokeratology lenses in terms of myopia correction and prevention of further progression, especially in semi-tropical countries; this study was designed to fill this gap. Methods: This prospective, intervention case series enrolled 30 eyes of 30 patients with myopia up to –5.5 diopters (D). Patients were randomized into two groups of 15 each; the study group was prescribed overnight orthokeratology (OK) lenses, while the control group used daily wear conventional soft contact lenses. Follow-up examinations were performed after 1 h and 6 h, and then at 1, 7, 15, 30 days, and 4 months post lens wear. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), contrast sensitivity, keratometry, central corneal thickness (CCT), and tear film break up time (TBUT) were evaluated at each follow-up examination. Results: All patients attained a visual acuity of 0.00 Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (logMAR) after one week of lens use, which was maintained throughout the study period. While patients allotted to the study group had a gain of 8.1 Snellen lines (UCVA), those in the control group gained 8.9 lines (BCVA) at the end of follow-up period. In the OK group, cornea showed a flattening of 0.8 D (mean keratometry) after single overnight usage of OK lens and overall flattening of 1.2 D compared to baseline, at the end of four months. The change in contrast sensitivity, corneal endothelial specular count, axial length and tear film status was not significant in either group. Conclusion: Orthokeratology is an effective and safe modality to correct moderate myopia in motivated young adults. No side effects were encountered after a short-term follow-up in participants who resided in semi-tropical environments.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Carracedo ◽  
T. M. Espinosa-Vidal ◽  
I. Martínez-Alberquilla ◽  
L. Batres

Purpose. To evaluate the effect of the optical zone diameter (OZ) in orthokeratology contact lenses regarding the topographical profile in patients with high myopia (−4.00 D to −7.00 D) and to study its effect over the visual quality. Materials and Methods. Twelve patients (18 eyes) were fitted with overnight orthokeratology (OrthoK) with a randomized 6 mm or 5 mm OZ lens worn for 2 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout period, between both designs. Keratometry (K) readings, optical zone treatment diameter (OZT), peripheral ring width (PRW), higher-order aberrations (HOA), high (HC) and low contrast (LC) visual acuity, and subjective vision and comfort were measured at baseline and after 2 weeks of OrthoK lens wear of each contact lens. Results. No significant differences were found between any measurements for the same subject at both baselines (p value > 0.05). There was no difference between OZ lens designs found in refraction, subjective vision or comfort, and HC and LC visual acuity. Contrast sensitivity was decreased in the 5 mm OZ lens design compared with 6 mm OZ design (p-value < 0.05). 5 mm OZ design provoked a greater flattening, more powerful midperipheral ring and 4th-order corneal and total spherical aberration than the 6 mm OZ design, being statistically significant after 7 days, for corneal aberration, and 15 days, for corneal and total, of wearing the lens (p-value < 0.05). The OZT obtained were 2.8 ± 0.2 mm and 3.1 ± 0.1 mm for 5 mm and 6 mm OZ design, respectively (p-value < 0.05). Regarding PRW, the 5 mm OZ design had a wider ring width in both the nasal and temporal zones (p-value < 0.05). Conclusions. A smaller diameter optical zone (5 mm) in orthokeratology lenses produces a smaller treatment area and a larger and more powerful midperipheral ring, increasing the 4th-order spherical aberration that affects only the contrast sensitivity but without differences in visual acuity and subjective vision compared with a larger OZ diameter (6 mm).


1998 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN DE BRABANDER ◽  
NICOLAS CHATEAU ◽  
FLORENCE BOUCHARD ◽  
SANDRINE GUIDOLLET

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. e43
Author(s):  
Chantal Coles-Brennan ◽  
Xin Wei ◽  
Tawnya Wilson ◽  
Jing Xu

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 134-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gonzalo Carracedo ◽  
Jesús Carballo ◽  
Elena Loma ◽  
Gema Felipe ◽  
Isabel Cacho

2007 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 1325-1332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aruna S. Rajagopalan ◽  
Edward S. Bennett ◽  
Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document