April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Accommodation error with single vision, bifocal and multifocal soft commercial contact lenses.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ravi C Bakaraju
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Cathleen Fedtke
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Klaus Ehrmann
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    School of Optometry and Vision Science, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Darrin Falk
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Jiyoon Chung
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Arthur Ho
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    School of Optometry and Vision Science, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Brien A Holden
    Brien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    School of Optometry and Vision Science, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Ravi Bakaraju, None; Cathleen Fedtke, BHVI (AU2011902736) (P); Klaus Ehrmann, BHVI (WO 2008/116270 A1, AU2011902736) (P); Darrin Falk, BHVI (AU2011902736) (P); Jiyoon Chung, None; Arthur Ho, BHVI (WO 2008/116270 A1, AU2011902736) (P); Brien Holden, BHVI (WO 2008/116270 A1, AU2011902736) (P)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 3760. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ravi C Bakaraju, Cathleen Fedtke, Klaus Ehrmann, Darrin Falk, Jiyoon Chung, Arthur Ho, Brien A Holden; Accommodation error with single vision, bifocal and multifocal soft commercial contact lenses.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):3760.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the accommodative error (AE) when young myopic adults are fitted with different types of single vision (SV), bifocal (BF) and multifocal (MF) commercial contact lenses (CL) in a monocular viewing condition.

Methods: On-axis ocular wavefronts of forty myopic participants (24.2 years ± 4.2, 65% Female, Spherical equivalent: -0.50 to -4.50D) were measured using the EyeMapper, a global aberrometer, when corrected unilaterally, one at a time, with: six SVCLs [AirOptix Aqua®, Proclear®, Acuvue Oasys®, Biofinity®, Clariti®, Focus Night & Day®]; three BFCLs [Acuvue® +1.50D & +2.50D add powers, Misight®]; and eight MFCLs [AirOptix Aqua® and Purevision® in low & high adds, Proclear® D & N in +1.50D & +2.50D adds]; at two object vergences: +1.00D (fogging state) and -3.00D accommodative demand. Each wavefront obtained as a 10th order Zernike polynomial (over a natural pupil size) was post-processed to obtain through-focus retinal image quality (TFRIQ) measures. Difference between the stimulus vergence and optimum defocus (in combination with the wavefront) required to maximize retinal image quality (RIQ) metric was defined as AE. Non-iterative methods such as least-square Zernike (2nd order) and Seidel or paraxial curvature-matching techniques (both 4th & 6th order) were also used to compute the AE.

Results: The magnitudes of the peaks of TFRIQ obtained with the SV correction were twice of those obtained with the high add BF/MFCLs. At 3D vergence, almost all the SV lenses produced optimal accommodative response when gauged via the Seidel method, however small amounts of lag (up to 0.50D) were observed when Zernike and iterative RIQ methods were considered. The Proclear D MF produced optimal responses with the iterative RIQ method but showed significant amounts of lag with Seidel technique; the reverse was observed with Proclear N, AirOptix and Purevision MFs, which held true for both high and low adds.

Conclusions: The AE measures obtained with the test lenses differed vastly with the method of calculation. This can be attributed primarily to interactions between the spherical aberration of the lens, the aberration of the accommodating eye, imposed defocus or combinations thereof. The AE obtained with the iterative RIQ methods were much small in magnitude for all test lenses with an exception of Proclear N.

Keywords: 404 accommodation • 477 contact lens • 626 aberrations  
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×