Masayoshi Kajita1, Taku Muraoka2, Gary Orsborn3. 1. Kajita Eye Clinic, Kyoei Building, 4F, 3-6-3, Shibaura, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: Kajitamd1147@h5.dion.ne.jp. 2. CooperVision Japan, Inc., 2-36-13, Ebisu, Shibuya-Ku, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: Taku.Muraoka@jp.coopervision.com. 3. CooperVision Inc., San Ramon, CA, United States. Electronic address: GOrsborn@coopervision.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Accommodative micro-fluctuations (AMF) are small dioptric changes during accommodation. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare changes in AMF when wearing silicone hydrogel contact lenses of two different optical designs. METHODS: A multi-centre, randomised, cross-over, non-dispensing study was conducted on 68 adapted contact lens wearers aged 25-35 years to compare AMF responses to a spherical and aspheric silicone hydrogel (comfilcon A) lens designs. A Righton Speedy "i" series Auto Refractometer in accommodation analyser mode was utilized before and after reading a standard text in font size 8 on an iPhone 5 for 20 min at a 25 cm viewing distance. Phone screen brightness was set by automatic adjustment mode and ambient illumination was controlled at all sites. RESULTS:Mean ± SD AMF change from before to after the reading task was 2.25 ± 5.6 and 0.13 ± 5.7 (relative values) for the spherical and aspheric lens designs, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.017, Paired t-test). CONCLUSIONS: The smaller change in AMF when using an aspheric lens design suggests reduced ciliary muscle stress when reading print on a smart phone at a close distance for short periods (20 min). Contact lens wearers who frequently use digital devices and are experiencing eye strain may benefit from switching from a spherical design to one that incorporates aspheric optics.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Accommodative micro-fluctuations (AMF) are small dioptric changes during accommodation. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare changes in AMF when wearing silicone hydrogel contact lenses of two different optical designs. METHODS: A multi-centre, randomised, cross-over, non-dispensing study was conducted on 68 adapted contact lens wearers aged 25-35 years to compare AMF responses to a spherical and aspheric silicone hydrogel (comfilcon A) lens designs. A Righton Speedy "i" series Auto Refractometer in accommodation analyser mode was utilized before and after reading a standard text in font size 8 on an iPhone 5 for 20 min at a 25 cm viewing distance. Phone screen brightness was set by automatic adjustment mode and ambient illumination was controlled at all sites. RESULTS: Mean ± SD AMF change from before to after the reading task was 2.25 ± 5.6 and 0.13 ± 5.7 (relative values) for the spherical and aspheric lens designs, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.017, Paired t-test). CONCLUSIONS: The smaller change in AMF when using an aspheric lens design suggests reduced ciliary muscle stress when reading print on a smart phone at a close distance for short periods (20 min). Contact lens wearers who frequently use digital devices and are experiencing eye strain may benefit from switching from a spherical design to one that incorporates aspheric optics.