Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorVera Vílchez, Jesús 
dc.contributor.authorRedondo Cabrera, Beatriz 
dc.contributor.authorGalán, Tomás
dc.contributor.authorMachado, Pedro
dc.contributor.authorMolina Romero, Rubén 
dc.contributor.authorJiménez Rodríguez, Raimundo 
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-08T08:34:01Z
dc.date.available2023-03-08T08:34:01Z
dc.date.issued2021-10-18
dc.identifier.citationJesús Vera... [et al.]. Dynamics of the accommodative response and facility with dual-focus soft contact lenses for myopia control, Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, Volume 46, Issue 1, 2023, 101526, ISSN 1367-0484, [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2021.101526]es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/80463
dc.description.abstractObjective: To assess the impact of using dual-focus soft contact lenses for myopia control on the dynamics of the accommodative response and facility. Methods: 24 young adult myopes were fitted with dual-focus soft contact lenses for myopia control (MiSight®) and single-vision soft contact lenses (Proclear®). The WAM-5500 open-field autorefractor was used to measure the dynamics of the accommodative response (magnitude and variability) in binocular conditions, with accommodative data being gathered from the dominant eye, at three viewing distances (500 cm, 40 cm, and 20 cm) during 90 s. Also, the binocular accommodative facility was assessed with the WAM-5500 autorefractor. All participants performed the same experimental protocol with the dual-focus (MiSight) and single-vision (Proclear) soft contact lenses, with both experimental sessions being carried in two different days and following a counterbalanced order. Results: This study showed greater lags of accommodation with the MiSight than the Proclear lenses at near distances (40 cm: 1.27 ± 0.77 vs. 0.68 ± 0.37 D, corrected p-value = 0.002, Cohen-d = 0.90; and 20 cm: 1.47 ± 0.84 vs. 1.01 ± 0.52 D, corrected p-value = 0.007, Cohen-d = 0.75), whereas a higher variability of accommodation was observed with the dual-focus than the single-vision lenses at 500 cm (0.53 ± 0.11 vs. 0.23 ± 0.10 D), 40 cm (0.82 ± 0.31 vs. 0.68 ± 0.37 D), and 20 cm (1.50 ± 0.56 vs. 1.15 ± 0.39 D) (corrected p-value < 0.001 in all cases, and Cohen-ds = 0.67–2.33). Also, a worse quantitative (27.75 ± 8.79 vs. 34.29 ± 10.08 cycles per minute, p = 0.029, Cohen-d = 0.48) and qualitative (23.68 ± 7.12 vs. 28.43 ± 7.97 score, p = 0.039, Cohen-d = 0.45) performance was observed with the MiSight when compared to the Proclear lenses. Conclusions: The use of dual-focus soft contact lenses for myopia control alters the dynamics of accommodative response and facility in the short-term. Although this optical design has demonstrated its effectiveness for myopia control, eye care specialists should be aware of the acute effects of these lenses on accommodation performance.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherElsevieres_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectAccommodative facilityes_ES
dc.subjectOcular accommodationes_ES
dc.subjectMultifocal lenseses_ES
dc.subjectMyopia managementes_ES
dc.titleDynamics of the accommodative response and facility with dual-focus soft contact lenses for myopia controles_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.clae.2021.101526
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Atribución 4.0 Internacional