Literature DB >> 25279781

A comparison of the short-term settling of three scleral lens designs.

Matthew J Kauffman1, Christopher A Gilmartin, Edward S Bennett, Carl J Bassi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Scleral gas-permeable lenses are rapidly gaining international popularity. Unlike corneal gas-permeable lenses, scleral lenses are fitted to the bulbar conjunctiva and settle into the tissue after insertion. To date, we are unaware of any studies examining the settling behavior of three varying scleral lens designs. The purpose of this study was to quantify the mean total settling and mean rates of settling for three scleral lens designs: Onefit P&A (Blanchard Contact Lens, Inc), Mini Scleral Design (msd) (Blanchard Contact Lens, Inc), and Jupiter (Visionary Optics).
METHODS: A randomized, repeated-measures study of Onefit P&A, msd, and Jupiter was performed. Subjects were fitted from a trial lens set, according to the manufacturer's guidelines. After insertion, lens settling was measured at 0 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, 6 hours, and 8 hours. Statistical analyses were performed using analysis of variance and two-stage, nonlinear regression analyses of settling over time.
RESULTS: On average, the Onefit P&amp;A, msd, and Jupiter lenses settled a total of 113.7, 133.7, and 88.1 μm, respectively. Although the rates of settling were not linear, analysis of variance revealed a significant difference in the average settling rates (p < 0.05) among the groups. Tukey analyses revealed a significant difference in the settling rates for msd and Jupiter comparison (p < 0.05). Nonlinear regression analyses predicted that the lenses settled to about 80% of the final estimated values for the Onefit P&amp;A lens, 90% for msd, and 99% for the Jupiter, after 8 hours.
CONCLUSION: We concluded that the amount of settling varied significantly among the three lens designs. Settling rates were greatest shortly after insertion. Larger lenses were estimated to be settled by 8 hours. Based on the results of this short-term study, careful consideration to the settling patterns of individual scleral lens designs should be given.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25279781     DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  6 in total

1.  Intraocular Pressure After 2 Hours of Small-Diameter Scleral Lens Wear.

Authors:  Cherie B Nau; Muriel M Schornack; Jay W McLaren; Arthur J Sit
Journal:  Eye Contact Lens       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.018

2.  A measure of tear inflow in habitual scleral lens wearers with and without midday fogging.

Authors:  Kelsea V Skidmore; Maria K Walker; Jason D Marsack; Jan P G Bergmanson; William L Miller
Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye       Date:  2018-11-16       Impact factor: 3.077

Review 3.  Therapeutic uses of scleral contact lenses for ocular surface disease: patient selection and special considerations.

Authors:  Jennifer S Harthan; Ellen Shorter
Journal:  Clin Optom (Auckl)       Date:  2018-07-11

4.  Practitioner Learning Curve in Fitting Scleral Lenses in Irregular and Regular Corneas Using a Fitting Trial.

Authors:  Rute J Macedo-de-Araújo; Eef van der Worp; José M González-Méijome
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 5.  How Can We Best Measure the Performance of Scleral Lenses? Current Insights.

Authors:  Rute J Macedo-de-Araújo; Daddi Fadel; Melissa Barnett
Journal:  Clin Optom (Auckl)       Date:  2022-04-07

Review 6.  Scleral lens for keratoconus: technology update.

Authors:  Varsha M Rathi; Preeji S Mandathara; Mukesh Taneja; Srikanth Dumpati; Virender S Sangwan
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-28
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.