June 2023
Volume 64, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2023
Visual Acuity and Refractive Error Quality of Life in Low Astigmats Corrected with Toric Contact Lenses Versus Spectacles
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Benjamin Straker
    Vision Care R&D, Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices, Jacksonville, Florida, United States
  • Giovanna Olivares
    Vision Care R&D, Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices, Jacksonville, Florida, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Benjamin Straker Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Code E (Employment), Johnson & Johnson, Code I (Personal Financial Interest), Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Code P (Patent); Giovanna Olivares Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Code E (Employment)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2023, Vol.64, 3518. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Benjamin Straker, Giovanna Olivares; Visual Acuity and Refractive Error Quality of Life in Low Astigmats Corrected with Toric Contact Lenses Versus Spectacles. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2023;64(8):3518.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : This study evaluated differences in High-Luminance, High-Contrast (HLHC) and High-Luminance, Low-Contrast (HLLC) Visual Acuity (VA), and refractive error quality of life (using the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life [NEI-RQL-42] questionnaire) between toric contact lens (CL) and spectacle lens (SL) correction in low astigmats.

Methods : This was a randomized, controlled, partially subject-masked, 2-treatment x 2-period crossover study. Habitual CL wearers from 18 to 39 years of age with low astigmatism (suitable for toric CLs with -0.75 or -1.25 DC cylinder power) in both eyes were recruited. At the first fitting visit, subjects were randomly assigned to wear either toric or spherical CLs (in senofilcon A) bilaterally for 7(±2) days in a daily wear, daily disposable modality. Following a 7(±2) day washout period, subjects wore the alternate CL type for a second wear period. Subjects wore habitual SLs during a 7(±2) wash-in period prior to the first CL fitting visit, and again during the washout period. Habitual SLs must have been within ±0.50 D of current refraction for sphere and cylinder power, and within ±20° of the current axis in both eyes. At follow-up visits and following the washout period, subjects completed the NEI-RQL-42 questionnaire, and monocular distance VA was measured with ETDRS charts under HLHC and HLLC conditions. At the final follow-up visit, subjects ranked the three corrections in terms of subjective preference.

Results : In total, 174 subjects were enrolled and 151 completed per-protocol. Approximately 73% of completed eyes wore toric CLs with -0.75 DC cylinder power. At follow-up, mean (±SD) HLHC VA was -0.13 (±0.08) and -0.11 (±0.08) logMAR, and mean LLHC VA was 0.06 (±0.10) and 0.09 (±0.10) logMAR for toric CL and SL correction, respectively. HLHC VA was statistically superior with toric CLs (least square mean difference [CL minus SL] = -0.02 logMAR, 95% CI = -0.03 to -0.01 logMAR). Mean (±SD) NEI-RQL-42 overall scores were 74.2 (±11.2) and 77.2 (±10.0) for SLs and toric CLs, respectively. Approximately twice as many subjects ranked toric CLs as ‘most preferred’ overall (54%) compared to SLs (25%).

Conclusions : These data suggest that, in low astigmats, performance of toric CLs is at least as good as SL correction in terms of VA and refractive error quality of life, with a strong subjective preference for the former.

This abstract was presented at the 2023 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in New Orleans, LA, April 23-27, 2023.

×
×

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.

×