N Tahhan1, R Du Toit, E Papas, H Chung, D La Hood, And B Holden. 1. Cooperative Research Centre for Eye Research and Technology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia. n.tahhan@visioncrc.org
Abstract
PURPOSE: The efficacy of overnight wear of four types of reverse-geometry lenses was compared. The length of time needed to achieve correction and any adverse events that occurred during the course of the study were recorded. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized study, 60 subjects (18 to 35 years old) with refractive error between -1.00 to -4.00 D (cyl </= -1.50) wore reverse-geometry lenses overnight only. All subjects were assigned a Rinehart Reeves lens in one eye, and subsets of 20 subjects were randomly assigned a Mountford BE, DreimLens, or Contex D Series 4 lens for the contralateral eye. Visits included baseline, dispensing, 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month. Biomicroscopy, unaided visual acuity, subjective refraction, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast and high and low illumination, corneal topography, and subjective rating data were collected. RESULTS:Forty-six subjects completed the study. At 1 month, there were no significant differences between lens types in their effect on unaided visual acuity, subjective sphere, subjective cylinder, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast at high illumination and low contrast at low illumination, apical corneal radius, corneal eccentricity, and subjective ratings. Between 1 week and 1 month, there was a significant improvement in subjective ratings of quality of day and night vision (p < 0.05) but no significant change in the objective measures. No significant ocular adverse events were observed during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The lens types tested were all similarly effective in the reduction of myopic refractive error. Subjective ratings continued to improve after objective measures stabilized at 1 week. Overnight lens wear proceeded for 1 month without significant adverse reactions.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The efficacy of overnight wear of four types of reverse-geometry lenses was compared. The length of time needed to achieve correction and any adverse events that occurred during the course of the study were recorded. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized study, 60 subjects (18 to 35 years old) with refractive error between -1.00 to -4.00 D (cyl </= -1.50) wore reverse-geometry lenses overnight only. All subjects were assigned a Rinehart Reeves lens in one eye, and subsets of 20 subjects were randomly assigned a Mountford BE, DreimLens, or Contex D Series 4 lens for the contralateral eye. Visits included baseline, dispensing, 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month. Biomicroscopy, unaided visual acuity, subjective refraction, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast and high and low illumination, corneal topography, and subjective rating data were collected. RESULTS: Forty-six subjects completed the study. At 1 month, there were no significant differences between lens types in their effect on unaided visual acuity, subjective sphere, subjective cylinder, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast at high illumination and low contrast at low illumination, apical corneal radius, corneal eccentricity, and subjective ratings. Between 1 week and 1 month, there was a significant improvement in subjective ratings of quality of day and night vision (p < 0.05) but no significant change in the objective measures. No significant ocular adverse events were observed during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The lens types tested were all similarly effective in the reduction of myopic refractive error. Subjective ratings continued to improve after objective measures stabilized at 1 week. Overnight lens wear proceeded for 1 month without significant adverse reactions.