Effect of Education on Myopia: Evidence from the United Kingdom ROSLA 1972 Reform

YesCross-sectional and longitudinal studies have consistently reported an association between education and myopia. However, conventional observational studies are at risk of bias due to confounding by factors such as socioeconomic position and parental educational attainment. The current study aimed to estimate the causal effect of education on refractive error using regression discontinuity analysis. Methods: Regression discontinuity analysis was applied to assess the influence on refractive error of the raising of the school leaving age (ROSLA) from 15 to 16 years introduced in England and Wales in 1972. For comparison, a conventional ordinary least squares (OLS) analysis was performed. The analysis sample comprised 21,548 UK Biobank participants born in a nine-year interval centered on September 1957, the date of birth of those first affected by ROSLA. Results: In OLS analysis, the ROSLA 1972 reform was associated with a −0.29 D (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.36 to −0.21, P < 0.001) more negative refractive error. In other words, the refractive error of the study sample became more negative by −0.29 D during the transition from a minimum school leaving age of 15 to 16 years of age. Regression discontinuity analysis estimated the causal effect of the ROSLA 1972 reform on refractive error as −0.77 D (95% CI: −1.53 to −0.02, P = 0.04). Conclusions: Additional compulsory schooling due to the ROSLA 1972 reform was associated with a more negative refractive error, providing additional support for a causal relationship between education and myopia.Global Education program of the Russian Federation government (DP) and an NIHR Senior Research Fellowship award SRF-2015-08-005 (CW), The Department for Health through an award made by the NIHR to the Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom (grant no. BRC2_009). Additional support was provided by The Special Trustees of Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom (grant no. ST 12 09

Effect of myopia management contact lens design on accommodative microfluctuations and eye movements during reading

YesBackground: Soft contact lenses have been developed and licensed for reducing myopia progression. These lenses have different designs, such as extended depth of focus (EDOF) and dual focus (DF). In this prospective, doublemasked, cross-over study, different lens designs were investigated to see whether these had impact on accommodative microfluctuations and eye movements during reading. Methods: Participants were fitted with three lenses in a randomised order; a single vision (SV) design (Omafilcon A2; Proclear), a DF design (Omafilcon A2; MiSight), and an EDOF lens design (Etafilcon A; NaturalVue),. Accommodative microfluctuations were measured at 25 cm for at least 60s in each lens, using a Shin-Nippon SRW-5000 autorefractor adapted to continuously record accommodation at 22Hz. Eye movement data was collected with the Thomson Clinical Eye Tracker incorporating a Tobii Eye bar. Eye movements include fixations per row, fixations per minute, mean regressions per row, total number of regressions, and total rightward saccades. Accommodation data was analysed using power spectrum analysis. Differences between the lenses were compared using a related sample two-way Friedman test. Results: Twenty-three participants (18–29 years) were recruited to take part. The average mean spherical error was − 2.65D ± 1.42DS, with an average age of 23.4 ± 3.5 years. No significant difference for accommodative microfluctuations was found. Significant differences were found for fixations per row (P = 0.03), fixations per minute (P = 0.008), mean regressions per row (P = 0.002), and total number of regressions (P = 0.002), but not total rightward saccades (P = 0.10). Post-hoc analysis indicated the EDOF lens results were significantly different from the other lenses, with more regressive eye movements observed. Conclusions: Regressive saccades appear to increase when wearing EDOF lens designs, which may impact visual comfort. Further studies in children, over a longer period of adaptation are necessary to assess the potential impact of this finding on daily reading activities in children.This project was supported by the British Contact Lens Association Summer Studentship Award (recipient Muskaan Hussain)

Clinical investigation of flat pack toric contact lenses and wearer attitudes to environmental impact

Objectives: To investigate the performance of a novel flat pack toric daily disposable contact lens compared with traditionally packaged toric lenses in a randomized, crossover study. Environmental attitudes to contact lens wear were also explored. Methods: Habitual contact lens wearers were recruited to wear a hioxifilcon A (Miru 1 day Flat Pack Toric, Menicon, Nagoya, Japan) test lens and a control lens: either nelfilcon A (Dailies AquaComfort Plus, Alcon, Geneva, Switzerland) or etafilcon A (1-Day Acuvue Moist, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ). Objective lens performance was assessed at fitting, and participants wore lenses in a randomized order for three consecutive days. Subjective measures of lens performance (comfort, vision, and handling) were then assessed by a questionnaire, with further questions on overall lens preference and environmental perceptions. Results: Objective measures of lens fit were similar for the test and control lenses, except for distance VA which was better with the control lenses (P<0.05; difference of two logMAR letters). End of day comfort was greater with the test lens, but this did not reach significance. Both lenses demonstrated similar scores for overall satisfaction. 87.5% of participants indicated the environmental impact of contact lenses to be important/extremely important to them, with 100% of participants identifying the flat pack packaging as having a smaller environmental impact. Conclusion: Overall, the lenses used in the study performed to similar levels. Environmental credentials are important to contact lens wearers, which may contribute to overall lens preference

Evidence that emmetropization buffers against both genetic and environmental risk factors for myopia

YesPURPOSE. To test the hypothesis that emmetropization buffers against genetic and environmental risk factors for myopia by investigating whether risk factor effect sizes vary depending on children’s position in the refractive error distribution. METHODS. Refractive error was assessed in participants from two birth cohorts: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) (noncycloplegic autorefraction) and Generation R (cycloplegic autorefraction). A genetic risk score for myopia was calculated from genotypes at 146 loci. Time spent reading, time outdoors, and parental myopia were ascertained from parent-completed questionnaires. Risk factors were coded as binary variables (0 = low, 1 = high risk). Associations between refractive error and each risk factor were estimated using either ordinary least squares (OLS) regression or quantile regression. RESULTS. Quantile regression: effects associated with all risk factors (genetic risk, parental myopia, high time spent reading, low time outdoors) were larger for children in the extremes of the refractive error distribution than for emmetropes and low ametropes in the center of the distribution. For example, the effect associated with having a myopic parent for children in quantile 0.05 vs. 0.50 was as follows: ALSPAC: age 15, –1.19 D (95% CI –1.75 to –0.63) vs. –0.13 D (–0.19 to –0.06), P = 0.001; Generation R: age 9, –1.31 D (–1.80 to –0.82) vs. –0.19 D (–0.26 to –0.11), P < 0.001. Effect sizes for OLS regression were intermediate to those for quantiles 0.05 and 0.50. CONCLUSIONS. Risk factors for myopia were associated with much larger effects in children in the extremes of the refractive error distribution, providing indirect evidence that emmetropization buffers against both genetic and environmental risk factors.UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (grant ref: 102215/2/13/2), and the University of Bristol provided core support for ALSPAC. This research was specifically funded by the UK National Eye Research Centre (grant SAC015), the Global Education Program of the Russian Federation government, a PhD studentship grant from the UK College of Optometrists (“Genetic Prediction of Individuals At-Risk for Myopia Development”), and an NIHR Senior Research Fellowship award SRF-2015-08-005. The Generation R study is supported by the Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO); Netherlands Organization for the Health Research and Development (ZonMw); the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science; the Ministry for Health,Welfare and Sports; the European Commission (DG XII); European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant 648268); the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO, grant 91815655); and Oogfonds, ODAS, Uitzicht 2017-28 (LSBS, MaculaFonds, Oogfonds)

Current approaches to soft contact lens handling training - Global perspectives

Purpose All neophyte contact lens wearers require training on how to handle contact lenses. Currently, almost no published information exists describing the most common approaches used by those involved in such training in soft contact lens wearers. This study aimed to gather information on the approaches taken by those conducting this training worldwide. Methods An online survey was created in English and translated to Spanish and distributed internationally via social media, conference attendees, and professional contacts. The anonymous survey included information on workplace setting of respondents, information about the typical approaches used for application and removal of soft contact lenses, length of the appointment, and success rate with their approach. Survey responses were received between May 2021 and April 2022. Results A total of 511 individuals completed the survey and responses were received from 31 countries with 48.7% from the UK. The most common approach taught for application was to have the patient hold the upper eyelashes (84.7%) and to hold the lower eyelid with the same hand as the lens (89.4%). Lenses were applied directly to the cornea by 57.7% of the respondents. The most common approach taught for lens removal was to drag the lens inferiorly from the cornea prior to removal (49.3%). Most respondents did not use videos to aid the teaching appointment (62.0%); however, they felt that their approach was successful in most cases (90). Application and removal training sessions lasted a median of 30 min and contact lenses were typically dispensed after the instructor witnessing successful application and removal three times. Conclusion Various methods are adopted globally for training of application and removal of soft contact lenses, with many advising a patient-specific approach is required for success. The results of this survey provide novel insights into soft contact lens handling training in clinical practice

BCLA CLEAR Presbyopia: Management with corneal techniques

Corneal techniques for enhancing near and intermediate vision to correct presbyopia include surgical and contact lens treatment modalities. Broad approaches used independently or in combination include correcting one eye for distant and the other for near or intermediate vision, (termed monovision or mini-monovision depending on the degree of anisometropia) and/or extending the eye's depth of focus [1]. This report provides an overview of the evidence for the treatment profile, safety, and efficacy of the range of corneal techniques currently available for managing presbyopia. The visual needs and expectations of the patient, their ocular characteristics, and prior history of surgery are critical considerations for patient selection and preoperative evaluation. Contraindications to refractive surgery include unstable refraction, corneal abnormalities, inadequate corneal thickness for the proposed ablation depth, ocular and systemic co-morbidities, uncontrolled mental health issues and unrealistic patient expectations. Laser refractive options for monovision include surface/stromal ablation techniques and keratorefractive lenticule extraction. Alteration of spherical aberration and multifocal ablation profiles are the primary means for increasing ocular depth of focus, using surface and non-surface laser refractive techniques. Corneal inlays use either small aperture optics to increase depth of field or modify the anterior corneal curvature to induce corneal multifocality. Presbyopia correction by conductive keratoplasty involves application of radiofrequency energy to the mid-peripheral corneal stroma which leads to mid-peripheral corneal shrinkage, inducing central corneal steepening. Hyperopic orthokeratology lens fitting can induce spherical aberration and correct some level of presbyopia. Postoperative management, and consideration of potential complications, varies according to technique applied and the time to restore corneal stability, but a minimum of 3 months of follow-up is recommended after corneal refractive procedures. Ongoing follow-up is important in orthokeratology and longer-term follow-up may be required in the event of late complications following corneal inlay surgery

Association between polygenic risk score and risk of myopia

YesImportance: Myopia is a leading cause of untreatable visual impairment and is increasing in prevalence worldwide. Interventions for slowing childhood myopia progression have shown success in randomized clinical trials; hence, there is a need to identify which children would benefit most from treatment intervention. Objectives: To examine whether genetic information alone can identify children at risk of myopia development and whether including a child’s genetic predisposition to educational attainment is associated with improved genetic prediction of the risk of myopia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Meta-analysis of 3 genome-wide association studies (GWAS) including a total of 711 984 individuals. These were a published GWAS for educational attainment and 2 GWAS for refractive error in the UK Biobank, which is a multisite cohort study that recruited participants between January 2006 and October 2010. A polygenic risk score was applied in a population-based validation sample examined between September 1998 and September 2000 (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children [ALSPAC] mothers). Data analysis was performed from February 2018 to May 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) in analyses for predicting myopia, using noncycloplegic autorefraction measurements for myopia severity levels of less than or equal to −0.75 diopter (D) (any), less than or equal to -3.00 D (moderate), or less than or equal to −5.00 D (high). The predictor variable was a polygenic risk score (PRS) derived from genome-wide association study data for refractive error (n = 95 619), age of onset of spectacle wear (n = 287 448), and educational attainment (n = 328 917). Results: A total of 383 067 adults aged 40 to 69 years from the UK Biobank were included in the new GWAS analyses. The PRS was evaluated in 1516 adults aged 24 to 51 years from the ALSPAC mothers cohort. The PRS had an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.70) for myopia, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70-0.79) for moderate myopia, and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.66-0.80) for high myopia. Inclusion in the PRS of information associated with genetic predisposition to educational attainment marginally improved the AUROC for myopia (AUROC, 0.674 vs 0.668; P = .02), but not those for moderate and high myopia. Individuals with a PRS in the top 10% were at 6.1-fold higher risk (95% CI, 3.4–10.9) of high myopia. Conclusions and Relevance: A personalized medicine approach may be feasible for detecting very young children at risk of myopia. However, accuracy must improve further to merit uptake in clinical practice; currently, cycloplegic autorefraction remains a better indicator of myopia risk (AUROC, 0.87).PhD studentship grant from the College of Optometrists (Drs Guggenheim and Williams; supporting Mr Mojarrad) entitled Genetic prediction of individuals at-risk for myopia development) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Research Fellowship award SRF-2015-08-005 (Dr Williams). The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome grant 102215/2/13/2 and the University of Bristol provide core support for the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf). This research was conducted using the UK Biobank Resource (application 17351). The UK Biobank was established by the Wellcome Trust, the UK Medical Research Council, the Department for Health (London, England), the Scottish government (Edinburgh, Scotland), and the Northwest Regional Development Agency (Warrington, England). It also received funding from the Welsh Assembly Government (Cardiff, Wales), the British Heart Foundation, and Diabetes UK

Genetic prediction of myopia

The number of people developing myopia and high myopia has increased in recent years, throughout Europe and Asia. This increased incidence is set to escalate further, with reports of nearly 50% of the population likely to develop myopia by 2050. Although investigations into what is causing this ‘myopia boom’ and its associated risk factors is currently ongoing, it is still not entirely clear why certain individuals are affected and not others. It is suspected that changes in the environment within recent years, such as a global push towards education, may be responsible. However, there is a large body of evidence that demonstrates the complexity of the refractive error phenotype and human emmetropisation, with reports identifying more than 150 genetic loci associated with myopia, implying some people may have a genetic predisposition to the condition. The aim of this thesis was to investigate whether inspecting genetic predisposition to myopia would allow us to detect individuals at risk, and determine whether a genetic model to predict children at risk was feasible. This may then help identify individuals who would benefit more from early intervention, or more regular monitoring. Initially, 149 genetic variants that reached genome-wide statistical significance in a GWAS for refractive error carried out by the CREAM consortium were used to create a ‘genetic risk score’ to assess the accuracy with which incident myopia could be predicted in children from the ALSPAC cohort. Analyses were also carried out for another predictor, namely the children’s number of myopic parents. The results suggested that the number of myopic parents was a better predictor of refractive error and incident myopia than the genetic risk score (R2 = 4.8% vs. 2.6%). This was likely due to several limitations in the genetic risk score. Notably, the results also demonstrated that these two predictors were largely independent, hence prediction accuracy improved when they were used together (R2 = 7.0%). To try and increase the accuracy of genetic prediction, I took advantage of the recently released genetic data from the UK Biobank cohort, for which a proportion (23%) of individuals also had ocular measurements taken. A genome wide association study (GWAS) was performed for autorefraction-measured refractive error in European individuals with both genetic and refractive data (N = 95,505), which replicated many loci previously shown to be associated with refractive error. A regression model to impute refractive error in UK Biobank participants who did not undergo autorefraction measurement was also created (to improve the accuracy of the existing genetic risk score by means of running an additional GWAS analysis, thus expanding the effective sample size used in the creation of the genetic risk score). A multi-variable model was developed using age of onset of first spectacle wear, age and gender; the model fit was optimised objectively. The resultant model yielded an imputed refractive error that was moderately explanative (R2 = 0.30) for the variance of ‘true’ (autorefraction-measured) refractive error, as judged in an independent sample. A GWAS for imputed refractive error was carried out in 287,448 European UK Biobank participants who were not amongst the 95,505 individuals included in the original GWAS for autorefraction-measured refractive error. The genetic correlation between the 2 traits (imputed refractive error vs. autorefraction-measured refractive error) was rg = 0.92, which confirmed that the imputed refractive error phenotype was a good surrogate for the true phenotype. Summary statistics from the 2 GWAS analyses described above were combined, along with GWAS summary statistics for educational attainment taken from a published study (www.SSGAC.org). Meta-analysis was performed using ‘multi-trait analysis of genome-wide association summary statistics’ (MTAG). The accuracy of the genetic risk scores in predicting refractive error was assessed in an independent sample of European adults (the ALSPAC mothers cohort). The best prediction accuracy was achieved by combining summary statistics for all 3 traits (autorefraction-measured refractive error, imputed refractive error, and educational attainment). The resultant genetic risk score explained 11.2% of the variance of refractive error, and demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of 0.67 and 0.75 for predicting any (≤ 0.75D) and moderate (≤-3.00D) myopia, respectively. Participants from the ALSPAC mothers cohort in the top 10th percentile of the genetic risk score were found to be at 6-fold greater risk of developing high myopia (≤-5.00D) compared to the remainder of the sample. The accuracy of the genetic risk score was also tested in individuals of Asian, Chinese, and Black ancestry. Prediction accuracy was reduced by approximately 50% in Asian and Chinese individuals. Prediction accuracy was worse still in those of Black ethnicity

Using big data to understand interest in myopia

SIGNIFICANCE: Popularity of publicly searched myopia terminologies is reported, for example, myopia control over myopia management and myopia over nearsighted or shortsighted. Insights are also provided for searches on specific myopia control interventions. The findings offer an evidence-based starting point for public messaging and communications by clinicians, policymakers, and other industry leaders. PURPOSE: Public understanding of myopia can be difficult to ascertain for clinicians. Although small-scale studies provide valuable snapshots of data, findings tend to be population-specific and thus difficult to extrapolate to global audiences. In this study, big data were used to provide a more comprehensive depiction of global market interest in myopia. METHODS: Google Trends data were used to analyze searches relating to myopia between January 2004 and August 2023. Data extracted were related to use of the terms myopia control and myopia management, with further searches executed for common myopia control interventions: orthokeratology, contact lenses, atropine, and glasses. Analysis into the search interest of other refractive error states, hyperopia and astigmatism, was also undertaken along with alternative terms that may be used to describe myopia. Where relevant, search trends were considered worldwide, by country, and over time. RESULTS: Myopia was a more popular search term than common layman alternatives such as nearsighted or shortsighted. Myopia control was found to be more popular than myopia management, and of the specific myopia interventions, atropine was most popular. Compared with astigmatism and hyperopia, relative search volumes were greatest for myopia, on average accounting for approximately 50% of the relative search volume at the country level. CONCLUSIONS: The differences identified in both popularity of myopia-related search terms and specific interventions may provide the basis for improvements in public messaging and facilitate patient-practitioner communication