Comparison of Reverse-Geometry Lens Designs for Overnight Orthokeratology

TLDR

In a prospective, randomized study of 60 subjects aged 18–35 with myopia (–1.00 to –4.00 D), each wore a reverse‑geometry lens overnight, with one eye assigned a Rinehart Reeves lens and the contralateral eye randomly assigned a Mountford BE, DreimLens, or Contex D Series 4 lens, and follow‑up visits at baseline, dispensing, 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month collected visual acuity, refraction, corneal topography, and subjective ratings. At one month, all lens types produced comparable improvements in myopic refractive error and visual acuity, with no significant differences in objective measures, while subjective ratings of day and night vision improved over time and no ocular adverse events were observed.

Abstract

The efficacy of overnight wear of four types of reverse-geometry lenses was compared. The length of time needed to achieve correction and any adverse events that occurred during the course of the study were recorded.In this prospective, randomized study, 60 subjects (18 to 35 years old) with refractive error between -1.00 to -4.00 D (cyl </= -1.50) wore reverse-geometry lenses overnight only. All subjects were assigned a Rinehart Reeves lens in one eye, and subsets of 20 subjects were randomly assigned a Mountford BE, DreimLens, or Contex D Series 4 lens for the contralateral eye. Visits included baseline, dispensing, 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month. Biomicroscopy, unaided visual acuity, subjective refraction, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast and high and low illumination, corneal topography, and subjective rating data were collected.Forty-six subjects completed the study. At 1 month, there were no significant differences between lens types in their effect on unaided visual acuity, subjective sphere, subjective cylinder, best-corrected visual acuity at high and low contrast at high illumination and low contrast at low illumination, apical corneal radius, corneal eccentricity, and subjective ratings. Between 1 week and 1 month, there was a significant improvement in subjective ratings of quality of day and night vision (p < 0.05) but no significant change in the objective measures. No significant ocular adverse events were observed during the trial.The lens types tested were all similarly effective in the reduction of myopic refractive error. Subjective ratings continued to improve after objective measures stabilized at 1 week. Overnight lens wear proceeded for 1 month without significant adverse reactions.