Purpose. To show the distribution of ocular dominance as measured with sensory and eye sighting methods and its potential relationship with high and low contrast LogMAR visual acuity in presbyopic subjects.Method. Forty-four presbyopes (48.5 ± 3.5 years) participated in this study. Ocular dominance was determined by eye sighting (hole-in-card) and sensorial (+1.50 D lens induced blur) methods. According to the dominance detected with each method (RE: right eye or LE: left eye), patients were classified in dominance type 1 (RE/RE), type 2 (RE/LE), type 3 (LE/RE) and type 4 (LE/LE).Results. Baseline refractive error (MSE) was RE:−0.36 ± 1.67 D and LE:−0.35 ± 1.85 D (P=0.930). RE was the dominant eye in 61.4% and 70.5% of times as obtained from sensorial and sighting methods, respectively. Most frequent dominance was of type 1 (52.3%), in this case the RE showed statistically significant better distance low contrast LogMAR VA (0.04 LogMAR units) compared to the LE (P<0.05).Conclusions. The dominance was more frequent in RE in this sample. The eye sighting and sensorial methods to define ocular dominance agreed in more than half of cases. Amount of MSE was not significantly different between dominant and non-dominant eye. But in case of right dominance, the RE presented better distance low contrast VA compared to the LE.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of orthokeratology for different degrees of myopia correction in the relative location of tangential (F(T)) and sagittal (F(S)) power errors across the central 70° of the visual field in the horizontal meridian. Thirty-four right eyes of 34 patients with a mean age of 25.2 ± 6.4 years were fitted with Paragon CRT (Mesa, AZ) rigid gas permeable contact lenses to treat myopia (-2.15 ± 1.26D, range: -0.88 to -5.25D). Axial and peripheral refraction were measured along the central 70° of the horizontal visual field with the Grand Seiko WAM5500 open-field auto-refractor. Spherical equivalent (M), as well as tangential (FT) and sagittal power errors (FS) were obtained. Analysis was stratified in three groups according to baseline spherical equivalent: Group 1 [M(Baseline) = -0.88 to -1.50D; n = 11], Group 2 [M(Baseline) = -1.51 to -2.49D; n = 11], and Group 3 [M(Baseline) = -2.50 to -5.25D; n = 12]. Spherical equivalent was significantly more myopic after treatment beyond the central 40° of the visual field (p < 0.001). FT became significantly more myopic for all groups in the nasal and temporal retina with 25° (p ≤ 0.017), 30° (p ≤ 0.007) and 35° (p ≤ 0.004) of eye rotation. Myopic change in FS was less consistent, achieving only statistical significance for all groups at 35° in the nasal and temporal retina (p ≤ 0.045). Orthokeratology changes significantly FT in the myopic direction beyond the central 40° of the visual field for all degrees of myopia. Changes induced by orthokeratology in relative peripheral M, FT and FS with 35° of eye rotation were significantly correlated with axial myopia at baseline.

Higher myopic refractive errors are associated with serious ocular complications that can put visual function at risk. There is respective interest in slowing and if possible stopping myopia progression before it reaches a level associated with increased risk of secondary pathology. The purpose of this report was to review our understanding of the rationale(s) and success of contact lenses (CLs) used to reduce myopia progression. A review commenced by searching the PubMed database. The inclusion criteria stipulated publications of clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of CLs in regulating myopia progression based on the primary endpoint of changes in axial length measurements and published in peer-reviewed journals. Other publications from conference proceedings or patents were exceptionally considered when no peer-review articles were available. The mechanisms that presently support myopia regulation with CLs are based on the change of relative peripheral defocus and changing the foveal image quality signal to potentially interfere with the accommodative system. Ten clinical trials addressing myopia regulation with CLs were reviewed, including corneal refractive therapy (orthokeratology), peripheral gradient lenses, and bifocal (dual-focus) and multifocal lenses. CLs were reported to be well accepted, consistent, and safe methods to address myopia regulation in children. Corneal refractive therapy (orthokeratology) is so far the method with the largest demonstrated efficacy in myopia regulation across different ethnic groups. However, factors such as patient convenience, the degree of initial myopia, and non-CL treatments may also be considered. The combination of different strategies (i.e., central defocus, peripheral defocus, spectral filters, pharmaceutical delivery, and active lens-borne illumination) in a single device will present further testable hypotheses exploring how different mechanisms can reinforce or compete with each other to improve or reduce myopia regulation with CLs.