Myopia: structural and functional correlates

Ocular dimensions are widely recognised as key variants of refractive error. Previously, accurate depiction of eye shape in vivo was largely restricted by limitations in the imaging techniques available. This thesis describes unique applications of the recently introduced 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) approach to evaluate human eye shape in a group of young adult subjects (n=76) with a range of ametropia (MSE= -19.76 to +4.38D). Specific MRI derived parameters of ocular shape are then correlated with measures of visual function. Key findings include the significant homogeneity of ocular volume in the anterior eye for a range of refractive errors, whilst significant volume changes occur in the posterior eye as a function of ametropia. Anterior vs. posterior eye differences have also been shown through evaluations of equivalent spherical radius; the posterior 25% cap of the eye was shown to be relatively steeper in myopes compared to emmetropes. Further analyses showed differences in retinal quadrant profiles; assessments of the maximum distance from the retinal surface to the presumed visual axes showed exaggerated growth of the temporal quadrant in myopic eyes. Comparisons of retinal contour values derived from transformation of peripheral refraction data were made with MRI; flatter retinal curvature values were noted when using the MRI technique. A distinctive feature of this work is the evaluation of the relationship between ocular structure and visual function. Multiple aspects of visual function were evaluated through several vehicles: multifocal electroretinogram testing, visual field sensitivity testing, and the use of psychophysical methods to determine ganglion cell density. The results show that many quadrantic structural and functional variations exist. In general, the data could not demonstrate a significant correlation between visual function and associated measures of ocular conformation either within or between myopic and emmetropic groups

Exploring contact lens opportunities for patients above the age of 40 years

Purpose Contact lenses offer a good option for patients with presbyopia, especially with improved optical designs available in modern multifocal contact lenses. Due to the ageing population there is good opportunity to increase contact lens penetration by managing these patients better. However, multifocal contact lenses achieve low penetration in the market. Methods A questionnaire was administered to people aged above 40 years, to investigate their perceptions of contact lenses for presbyopia. Only people, with presbyopia, who were existing contact lens wearers or willing to try contact lenses were included. Participants were recruited from United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (USA), Netherlands, Germany, France, Spain and Italy. Results Data from 1540 participants above the age of 40 years was collected, 57.9% were females and 42.1% males. Overall, 50.8% of the participants wore contact lenses, but contact lens wear was less common amongst older participants. Some data supported earlier studies, such as 6.1% wore gas permeable lenses. However, only 25% of the contact lens wearers used multifocal contact lenses. The reasons the participants wanted to wear contact lenses were similar to younger patient such as sports or cosmesis reasons. Reasons why participants had dropped out of contact lenses included discomfort and dry eye related issues. Poor visual performance with contact lenses was a reason to dropout of contact lenses for the older participants. Conclusions The study highlights some failings by eye care practitioners in the management of patients with presbyopia. It seems that patients of this age group are seeking suggestions and recommendations from their eye care practitioner including upgrading contact lenses and dual wear options. The day-to-day problems encountered by the contact lens wearers in this study seem to be, in the main, things that could be easily tackled by additional counselling and instruction from the eye care practitioners

The effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on working practices of UK primary care optometrists

Purpose: In late 2019, a new coronavirus capable of infecting humans, SARS‐CoV‐2, was identified in Wuhan, China. The resultant respiratory disease was subsequently named COVID‐19. In March 2020, in response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, primary care optometry practices only remained open to deliver essential or emergency eye care. This study aimed to characterise the experiences of United Kingdom (UK)‐based primary care optometrists during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: An email invitation to participate in an online cross‐sectional survey was sent to 3000 UK‐based, currently practicing members of The College of Optometrists (UK). Responses to the structured questionnaire were analysed using descriptive statistics, including frequencies, means and standard deviations. Frequency analyses were used to evaluate items with multiple responses. Free‐text responses were examined using thematic analyses. Results: After data cleaning, a total of 1250 responses remained. Sixty‐three percent were female, 70% self‐identified as being of white ethnicity and 78% were based in England. During the first national lockdown, over half of all respondents were involved with the provision of remote consultations for emergency/urgent care. The majority felt ‘very’/‘moderately’ comfortable conducting remote consultations, but 66% felt professional liability was increased. Forty percent were involved in the provision of face‐to‐face consultations. Eye‐health and vision‐related problems were the most commonly reported patient issues during both remote and face‐to‐face consultations, while contact‐lens related problems were the least. Thematic analysis of the responses showed several challenges adjusting to the pandemic (e.g., working safely), but also some potential benefits (e.g., increased skills). Conclusions: The findings provide an overview of changes to optometric practice in the UK during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The results may be used to inform the development of professional guidance and facilitate resource allocation for safe and effective eye care during this and any future pandemics

Optometry practice in the UK in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic: initial response and ongoing clinical implications

To minimise the spread of COVID-19 during the pandemic, optometric practices had to restructure their service provision in order to provide a safe eyecare environment for their patients. These changes included the introduction of new pathways, enhanced infection control procedures, changes to assessment routines and greater use of remote consultations. Nagra et al. recently published a paper detailing the results of a survey conducted on practising members of the College of Optometrists investigating changes in clinical optometric practice in the UK as a result of the pandemic. This article summarises the key findings of the survey including the challenges and benefits identified, such as how to ensure safe working practices, how to continue to provide a comprehensive service and navigation of the financial implications. Benefits such as refined pathways, streamlined services, increased skill acquisition and improved professional relationships are also highlighted. The impact on current practice and implications for future clinical care are also discussed

Open versus closed view autorefraction in young adults

Purpose: While there are numerous studies comparing open-view autorefractors to subjective refraction or other open-view autorefractors, most studies between closed and open-view autorefraction tend to focus on children rather than young adults. The aim of this study was to determine the concordance in non-cycloplegic refractive error between two modern objective autorefractors: the closed-view monocular Topcon TRK-2P and the binocular open-view Grand Seiko WR-5500. Methods: Fifty young adults aged 20–29 years (mean age 22 ± 1.6 years) underwent non-cycloplegic autorefraction using the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 (open view) and Topcon TRK-2P (closed-view) autorefractors on both eyes. Findings were expressed as the isolated spherical component and were also converted from clinical to vector notation: Mean Spherical Error (MSE) and the astigmatic components J0 and J45. Results: Mean MSE ± SD was −1.00 ± 2.40D for the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 compared to −1.23 ± 2.29D for the Topcon TRK-2P. Up to seventy-six percent of the cohort had mean spherical errors from the Topcon TRK-2P which fell within ±0.50D of the Grand Seiko reading and 58% fell within ±0.25D. Mean differences between the two instruments were statistically significant for all components (J0, spherical, and MSE) (p  0.05). Conclusions: The differences in non-cycloplegic MSE between these two instruments are small, but statistically significant. From a clinical perspective the Topcon TRK-2P may serve as a useful starting point for subjective refraction, but additional work is needed to help further minimise differences between the instruments

Estimation of ocular volume from axial length

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To determine which biometric parameters provide optimum predictive power for ocular volume. METHODS: Sixty-seven adult subjects were scanned with a Siemens 3-T MRI scanner. Mean spherical error (MSE) (D) was measured with a Shin-Nippon autorefractor and a Zeiss IOLMaster used to measure (mm) axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and corneal radius (CR). Total ocular volume (TOV) was calculated from T2-weighted MRIs (voxel size 1.0 mm(3)) using an automatic voxel counting and shading algorithm. Each MR slice was subsequently edited manually in the axial, sagittal and coronal plane, the latter enabling location of the posterior pole of the crystalline lens and partitioning of TOV into anterior (AV) and posterior volume (PV) regions. RESULTS: Mean values (±SD) for MSE (D), AL (mm), ACD (mm) and CR (mm) were -2.62±3.83, 24.51±1.47, 3.55±0.34 and 7.75±0.28, respectively. Mean values (±SD) for TOV, AV and PV (mm(3)) were 8168.21±1141.86, 1099.40±139.24 and 7068.82±1134.05, respectively. TOV showed significant correlation with MSE, AL, PV (all p<0.001), CR (p=0.043) and ACD (p=0.024). Bar CR, the correlations were shown to be wholly attributable to variation in PV. Multiple linear regression indicated that the combination of AL and CR provided optimum R(2) values of 79.4% for TOV. CONCLUSION: Clinically useful estimations of ocular volume can be obtained from measurement of AL and CR

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 contact lenses and spectacles

This paper seeks to outline the history, market situation, clinical management and product performance related to the correction of presbyopia with both contact lenses and spectacles. The history of the development of various optical forms of presbyopic correction are reviewed, and an overview is presented of the current market status of contact lenses and spectacles. Clinical considerations in the fitting and aftercare of presbyopic contact lens and spectacle lens wearers are presented, with general recommendations for best practice. Current options for contact lens correction of presbyopia include soft simultaneous, rigid translating and rigid simultaneous designs, in addition to monovision. Spectacle options include single vision lenses, bifocal lenses and a range of progressive addition lenses. The comparative performance of both contact lens and spectacle lens options is presented. With a significant proportion of the global population now being presbyopic, this overview is particularly timely and is designed to act as a guide for researchers, industry and eyecare practitioners alike

Optimising Subjective Anterior Eye Grading Precision

Purpose: To establish the optimum grading increment which ensured parity between practitioners while maximising clinical precision. Methods: Second year optometry students (n = 127, 19.5 ± 1.4 years, 55 % female) and qualified eye care practitioners (n = 61, 40.2 ± 14.8 years, 52 % female) had 30 s to grade each of bulbar, limbal and palpebral hyperaemia of the upper lid of 4 patients imaged live with a digital slit lamp under 16× magnification, diffuse illumination, with the image projected on a screen. The patients were presented in a randomised sequence 3 times in succession, during which the graders used the Efron printed grading scale once to the nearest 0.1 increment, once to nearest 0.5 increment and once to the nearest integer grade in a randomised order. Graders were masked to their previous responses. Results: For most grading conditions less than 20 % of clinicians showed a ≤0.1 difference in grade from the mean. In contrast, more than 50 % of the student graders and 40 % of experienced graders showed a difference in grade from the mean within 0.5 for all conditions under measurement. Student precision in grading was better with both 0.1 and 0.5 grading increments than grading to the nearest unit, except for limbal hyperaemia where they performed more accurately with 0.5 unit increment grading. Limbal grading precision was not affected by grading step increment for experienced practitioners, but 0.1 and 0.5 grading increments were both better than the 1.0 grading increment for bulbar hyperaemia and the 0.1 grading increment was better than the 0.5 grading increment and both were better than the 1.0 grading increment for palpebral hyperaemia. Conclusion: Although narrower interval scales maximise the ability to detect smaller clinical changes, the grading increment should not exceed one standard deviation of the discrepancy between measurements. Therefore, 0.5 grading increments are recommended for subjective anterior eye physiology grading (limbal, bulbar and palpebral redness)