IMI : global trends in myopia management attitudes and strategies in clinical practice : 2022 update

PURPOSE. Surveys in 2015 and 2019 identified a high level of eye care practitioner concern/activity about myopia, but the majority still prescribed single vision interventions to young myopes. This research aimed to provide updated information. METHODS. A self-administered, internet-based questionnaire was distributed in 13 languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questions examined awareness of increasing myopia prevalence, perceived efficacy and adoption of available strategies, and reasons for not adopting specific strategies. RESULTS. Of the 3195 respondents, practitioners’ concern about the increasing frequency of pediatric myopia in their practices differed between continents (P < 0.001), being significantly higher in Asia (9.0 ± 1.5 of 10) than other continents (range 7.7–8.2; P ≤ 0.001). Overall, combination therapy was perceived by practitioners to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by orthokeratology and pharmaceutical approaches. The least effective perceived methods were single vision distance undercorrection, spectacles and contact lenses, as well as bifocal spectacles. Practitioners rated their activity in myopia control between (6.6 ± 2.9 in South America to 7.9 ± 1.2/2.2 in Australasia and Asia). Single-vision spectacles are still the most prescribed option for progressing young myopia (32.2%), but this has decreased since 2019, and myopia control spectacles (15.2%), myopia control contact lenses (8.7%) and combination therapy (4.0%) are growing in popularity. CONCLUSIONS. More practitioners across the globe are practicing myopia control, but there are still significant differences between and within continents. Practitioners reported that embracing myopia control enhanced patient loyalty, increasing practice revenue and improving job satisfaction

Non-Biofouling Fluorinated Block Copolymer Coatings for Contact Lenses

Films of two fluorinated block copolymers (P(S81-Sz6) and P(S81-Sz11)) were investigated and compared with those of a commercial Teflon-like polymer (PTFE-AF) in the search for novel non-biofouling coatings able to minimize the amount of tear fluid (TF) proteins absorbed on contact lens (CL) surfaces. The adsorption of a solution containing lysozyme, albumin and immunoglobulin G (mimicking the TF composition) on the fluorinated block copolymers was evaluated using a quartz crystal microbalance. P(S81-Sz11) was found to resist protein adsorption more effectively than P(S81-Sz6) and PTFE-AF. The different interaction of P(S81-Sz6) and P(S81-Sz11) with the artificial TF was attributed to creation of a more heterogeneous and moderately hydrophobic surface of the latter polymer film by dynamic contact angle and atomic force microscopy studies. Moreover, deposition of P(S81-Sz11) on a CL-like silicone (PDMS) and a CL thin films demonstrated a protein adsorption reduction of up to 70% relative to pristine PDMS and commercial CL thin films

CLEAR - Scleral lenses

Scleral lenses were the first type of contact lens, developed in the late nineteenth century to restore vision and protect the ocular surface. With the advent of rigid corneal lenses in the middle of the twentieth century and soft lenses in the 1970’s, the use of scleral lenses diminished; in recent times there has been a resurgence in their use driven by advances in manufacturing and ocular imaging technology. Scleral lenses are often the only viable form of contact lens wear across a range of clinical indications and can potentially delay the need for corneal surgery. This report provides a brief historical review of scleral lenses and a detailed account of contemporary scleral lens practice including common indications and recommended terminology. Recent research on ocular surface shape is presented, in addition to a comprehensive account of modern scleral lens fitting and on-eye evaluation. A range of optical and physiological challenges associated with scleral lenses are presented, including options for the clinical management of a range of ocular conditions. Future applications which take advantage of the stability of scleral lenses are also discussed. In summary, this report presents evidence-based recommendations to optimise patient outcomes in modern scleral lens practice.</p