Effects of optical correction method on the magnitude and variability of accommodative response: A test-retest study

Raimundo Jiménez, Beatriz Redondo, Leon N Davies, Jesús Vera

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE The present study addresses the accommodative response and its dependence on the type of optical correction used. The results are discussed relative to their possible implications for myopia progression and visual fatigue. PURPOSE The accommodative response has been investigated owing to its possible relationship with the onset and progression of myopia and visual fatigue. This study explored the influence of wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles in terms of magnitude and variability of accommodation. In addition, we analyzed the intersession and intermethod repeatability. METHODS Dynamic accommodative response was recorded during 30-second epochs, at five different distances (50, 40, 33, 25, and 20 cm), in 21 individuals (mean refractive error ± SD, -0.79 ± 1.39 D) while wearing either soft contact lenses or spectacles on two different days. To assess repeatability, a second identical intervention was conducted. RESULTS Higher lags of accommodation were obtained with the use of soft contact lenses in comparison with the spectacle condition (P =.04, partial η 2p 2] = 0.204), and similarly, a higher variability of accommodation at near distances was found during the soft contact lens measurement (P <.001, η p 2 = 0.647). There was a strong intersession repeatability at all the distances tested for both optical correction methods. CONCLUSIONS The higher accommodative lag and fluctuations found while wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles may help to understand the mechanisms underlying myopia progression and asthenopia. These findings may be also considered when testing the accommodative response in research settings. Our test-retest design confirmed that there is a very good intersession repeatability for all the distances in both optical correction methods.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)568-578
Number of pages11
JournalOptometry and Vision Science
Volume96
Issue number8
Early online date23 Jul 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2019

Fingerprint

Hydrophilic Contact Lens
Asthenopia
Myopia
Refractive Errors
Research

Bibliographical note

© 2019 American Academy of Optometry. This is the author's accepted manuscript of the article: Effects of Optical Correction Method on the Magnitude and Variability of Accommodative Response: A Test-retest Study. Optometry and Vision Science. 96(8):568-578, August 2019.

Cite this

@article{e9d3ae44ab704704af986d428b5ed533,
title = "Effects of optical correction method on the magnitude and variability of accommodative response: A test-retest study",
abstract = "SIGNIFICANCE The present study addresses the accommodative response and its dependence on the type of optical correction used. The results are discussed relative to their possible implications for myopia progression and visual fatigue. PURPOSE The accommodative response has been investigated owing to its possible relationship with the onset and progression of myopia and visual fatigue. This study explored the influence of wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles in terms of magnitude and variability of accommodation. In addition, we analyzed the intersession and intermethod repeatability. METHODS Dynamic accommodative response was recorded during 30-second epochs, at five different distances (50, 40, 33, 25, and 20 cm), in 21 individuals (mean refractive error ± SD, -0.79 ± 1.39 D) while wearing either soft contact lenses or spectacles on two different days. To assess repeatability, a second identical intervention was conducted. RESULTS Higher lags of accommodation were obtained with the use of soft contact lenses in comparison with the spectacle condition (P =.04, partial η 2 [η p 2] = 0.204), and similarly, a higher variability of accommodation at near distances was found during the soft contact lens measurement (P <.001, η p 2 = 0.647). There was a strong intersession repeatability at all the distances tested for both optical correction methods. CONCLUSIONS The higher accommodative lag and fluctuations found while wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles may help to understand the mechanisms underlying myopia progression and asthenopia. These findings may be also considered when testing the accommodative response in research settings. Our test-retest design confirmed that there is a very good intersession repeatability for all the distances in both optical correction methods.",
author = "Raimundo Jim{\'e}nez and Beatriz Redondo and Davies, {Leon N} and Jes{\'u}s Vera",
note = "{\circledC} 2019 American Academy of Optometry. This is the author's accepted manuscript of the article: Effects of Optical Correction Method on the Magnitude and Variability of Accommodative Response: A Test-retest Study. Optometry and Vision Science. 96(8):568-578, August 2019.",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/OPX.0000000000001406",
language = "English",
volume = "96",
pages = "568--578",
journal = "Optometry and Vision Science",
issn = "1040-5488",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "8",

}

Effects of optical correction method on the magnitude and variability of accommodative response: A test-retest study. / Jiménez, Raimundo; Redondo, Beatriz; Davies, Leon N; Vera, Jesús.

In: Optometry and Vision Science, Vol. 96, No. 8, 01.08.2019, p. 568-578.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of optical correction method on the magnitude and variability of accommodative response: A test-retest study

AU - Jiménez, Raimundo

AU - Redondo, Beatriz

AU - Davies, Leon N

AU - Vera, Jesús

N1 - © 2019 American Academy of Optometry. This is the author's accepted manuscript of the article: Effects of Optical Correction Method on the Magnitude and Variability of Accommodative Response: A Test-retest Study. Optometry and Vision Science. 96(8):568-578, August 2019.

PY - 2019/8/1

Y1 - 2019/8/1

N2 - SIGNIFICANCE The present study addresses the accommodative response and its dependence on the type of optical correction used. The results are discussed relative to their possible implications for myopia progression and visual fatigue. PURPOSE The accommodative response has been investigated owing to its possible relationship with the onset and progression of myopia and visual fatigue. This study explored the influence of wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles in terms of magnitude and variability of accommodation. In addition, we analyzed the intersession and intermethod repeatability. METHODS Dynamic accommodative response was recorded during 30-second epochs, at five different distances (50, 40, 33, 25, and 20 cm), in 21 individuals (mean refractive error ± SD, -0.79 ± 1.39 D) while wearing either soft contact lenses or spectacles on two different days. To assess repeatability, a second identical intervention was conducted. RESULTS Higher lags of accommodation were obtained with the use of soft contact lenses in comparison with the spectacle condition (P =.04, partial η 2 [η p 2] = 0.204), and similarly, a higher variability of accommodation at near distances was found during the soft contact lens measurement (P <.001, η p 2 = 0.647). There was a strong intersession repeatability at all the distances tested for both optical correction methods. CONCLUSIONS The higher accommodative lag and fluctuations found while wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles may help to understand the mechanisms underlying myopia progression and asthenopia. These findings may be also considered when testing the accommodative response in research settings. Our test-retest design confirmed that there is a very good intersession repeatability for all the distances in both optical correction methods.

AB - SIGNIFICANCE The present study addresses the accommodative response and its dependence on the type of optical correction used. The results are discussed relative to their possible implications for myopia progression and visual fatigue. PURPOSE The accommodative response has been investigated owing to its possible relationship with the onset and progression of myopia and visual fatigue. This study explored the influence of wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles in terms of magnitude and variability of accommodation. In addition, we analyzed the intersession and intermethod repeatability. METHODS Dynamic accommodative response was recorded during 30-second epochs, at five different distances (50, 40, 33, 25, and 20 cm), in 21 individuals (mean refractive error ± SD, -0.79 ± 1.39 D) while wearing either soft contact lenses or spectacles on two different days. To assess repeatability, a second identical intervention was conducted. RESULTS Higher lags of accommodation were obtained with the use of soft contact lenses in comparison with the spectacle condition (P =.04, partial η 2 [η p 2] = 0.204), and similarly, a higher variability of accommodation at near distances was found during the soft contact lens measurement (P <.001, η p 2 = 0.647). There was a strong intersession repeatability at all the distances tested for both optical correction methods. CONCLUSIONS The higher accommodative lag and fluctuations found while wearing soft contact lenses in comparison with spectacles may help to understand the mechanisms underlying myopia progression and asthenopia. These findings may be also considered when testing the accommodative response in research settings. Our test-retest design confirmed that there is a very good intersession repeatability for all the distances in both optical correction methods.

UR - https://journals.lww.com/optvissci/fulltext/2019/08000/Effects_of_Optical_Correction_Method_on_the.4.aspx

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071061027&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001406

DO - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001406

M3 - Article

VL - 96

SP - 568

EP - 578

JO - Optometry and Vision Science

JF - Optometry and Vision Science

SN - 1040-5488

IS - 8

ER -