Case Report: When Two Is Worse Than One-Stereo Imbalance in a Case of Wavefront-guided Scleral Lenses.

SIGNIFICANCE: Wavefront-guided scleral lenses (WGSLs) reduce visually debilitating residual higher-order aberrations. Although reduced higher-order aberrations lead to improvement in monocular high-contrast visual acuity (VA), the success of the lenses in everyday life depends on additional factors such as retinal contrast, binocular balance, and stereoacuity. PURPOSE: This report describes a case where WGSLs provided improved monocular vision compared with scleral lenses (SLs) but reduced binocularity and stereoacuity. CASE REPORT: A 48-year-old woman with moderate keratoconus right eye (OD) and severe left eye (OS) was fitted with SLs and WGSLs. Visual acuity with best SLs was 20/20 -2 OD and 20/25 -2 OS. Residual higher-order root-mean-square (HORMS) wavefront error (6 mm pupil) was 0.56 µm OD and 1.38 µm OS. Visual acuity with WGSLs was 20/16 -2 OD and 20/25 +2 OS, and residual HORMS was 0.41 µm OD and 0.98 µm OS. Monocularly, WGSLs were reported to provide better VA. However, binocularly, the patient reported an "imbalanced feeling" and preferred the SLs over WGSLs. Binocular VA at distance was 20/25 with SLs and 20/25 -2 with WGSL. To investigate, the Worth Four-Dot test was performed, and the outcomes reported fusion with SLs but suppression OS at distance with WGSLs. Stereoacuity was 160 arc seconds at near and 120 arc seconds at distance with SLs and 400 arc seconds at near and >1200 arc seconds at distance with WGSLs. Dichoptic contrast balancing showed a balance point of 0.48 with SLs and 0.17 with WGSLs, indicating a strong preference toward OD. Simulation of the patient's retinal image revealed a greater difference in image contrast between the two eyes with WGSLs. CONCLUSIONS: Wavefront-guided scleral lenses reduced HORMS and improved VA compared with SLs. However, in this case, it inadvertently caused binocular imbalance. As WGSLs become more widely available, future work should include methods to optimize binocular balance to maximize overall patient satisfaction.

Utilising a visual image quality metric to optimise spectacle prescriptions for eyes with keratoconus.

PURPOSE: To compare optical performance, visual performance, and patient-perceived quality of vision with: (1) spectacles determined using subjective refraction and (2) spectacles determined using an objective optimisation method based on wavefront aberration data for eyes with keratoconus. METHODS: Thirty-seven eyes (20 subjects) with keratoconus underwent both subjective refraction and uncorrected wavefront aberration measurement. Wavefront aberration data were used to objectively identify a sphero-cylindrical refraction that optimised the visual image quality metric visual Strehl ratio (VSX). The two refractions were assembled in trial frames and worn by the subject in a random order. High-contrast visual acuity (VA), letter contrast sensitivity (CS), and the patient's short-term subjective preference were recorded for each prescription. RESULTS: Median magnitude of the dioptric difference (a measure of similarity between the subjective and objective refractions) was 2.77 D (range = 0.21-20.44 D, first quartile = 1.02 D, third quartile = 4.36 D). Sixty-eight per cent of eyes had better VA with the objective refraction and 32% of eyes gained more than one line of VA. Monocularly, objective refraction was preferred 68% of the time when looking at a distant acuity chart and 76% of the time when viewing a real-world dynamic scene. CONCLUSIONS: Objective refraction based on visual image quality derived from wavefront aberration data can be valuable in the determination of monocular spectacle refractions for individuals with keratoconus.

Dioptric differences between clinically determined and metric-optimised refractions for adults with Down syndrome.

PURPOSE: Refractions based on the optimisation of single-value wavefront-derived metrics may help determine appropriate corrections for individuals with Down syndrome where clinical techniques fall short. This study compared dioptric differences between refractions obtained using standard clinical techniques and two metric-optimised methods: visual Strehl ratio (VSX) and pupil fraction tessellated (PFSt), and investigated characteristics that may contribute to the differences between refraction types. METHODS: Thirty adults with Down syndrome (age = 29 ± 10 years) participated. Three refractive corrections (VSX, PFSt and clinical) were determined and converted to vector notation (M, J0 , J45 ) to calculate the dioptric difference between pairings of each type using a mixed model repeated measures approach. Linear correlations and multivariable regression were performed to examine the relationship between dioptric differences and the following participant characteristics: higher order root mean square (RMS) for a 4 mm pupil diameter, spherical equivalent refractive error and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (a measure of developmental ability). RESULTS: The least squares mean estimates (standard error) of the dioptric differences for each pairing were as follows: VSX versus PFSt = 0.51 D (0.11); VSX versus clinical = 1.19 D (0.11) and PFSt versus clinical = 1.04 D (0.11). There was a statistically significant difference in the dioptric differences between the clinical refraction and each of the metric-optimised refractions (p < 0.001). Increased dioptric differences in refraction were correlated with increased higher order RMS (R = 0.64, p < 0.001 [VSX vs. clinical] and R = 0.47, p < 0.001 [PFSt vs. clinical]) as well as increased myopic spherical equivalent refractive error (R = 0.37, p = 0.004 [VSX vs. clinical] and R = 0.51, p < 0.001 [PFSt vs. clinical]). CONCLUSIONS: The observed differences in refraction demonstrate that a significant portion of the refractive uncertainty is related to increased higher order aberrations and myopic refractive error. Methodology surrounding clinical techniques and metric-optimisation based on wavefront aberrometry may explain the difference in refractive endpoints.

Visual Acuity Outcomes in a Randomized Trial of Wavefront Metric-optimized Refractions in Adults with Down Syndrome.

SIGNIFICANCE: This study reports visual acuity outcomes from a clinical trial investigating an objective refraction strategy that may provide a useful tool for practitioners needing additional strategies to identify refractive corrections for adults with intellectual disability. PURPOSE: Determining refractions for individuals with Down syndrome is challenging because of the presence of elevated refractive error, optical aberrations, and cognitive impairment. This randomized clinical trial evaluated the performance of spectacle corrections determined using clinical techniques and objective refractions derived from wavefront aberration measures. METHODS: Thirty adults with Down syndrome had a clinical refraction determined by a single expert examiner using pre-dilation and post-dilation techniques appropriate for this population. Objective refractions were determined from dilated wavefront aberration measures that were processed post-visit to identify refractions that optimized each of two image quality metrics: pupil fraction tessellated and visual Strehl ratio in the spatial domain. The three refractions were dispensed in random order and worn for 2 months each. The primary outcome measure, binocular visual acuity, was obtained by a masked examiner administering a distance logMAR acuity test. To compare treatment types, mean acuity was compared using a two-sided type 3 F test of the treatment effect in a linear mixed-effects regression model, where the final model included fixed effects for treatment, period (1, 2, or 3), and first-order carryover effects. RESULTS: The 2-month estimated least square means in binocular visual acuity (logMAR) were 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25 to 0.39) for clinical refractions, 0.31 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.36) for pupil fraction tesselated refractions, and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.38) for visual Strehl ratio refractions. No statistically significant treatment effect was observed (F = 1.10, P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Objective refractions derived from dilated wavefront aberration measures resulted in acuity similar to expert clinician-derived refractions, suggesting that the objective method may be a suitable alternative for patients with Down syndrome.

Clinical applications of personalising the neural components of visual image quality metrics for individual eyes.

PURPOSE: Eyecare is evolving increasingly personalised corrections and increasingly personalised evaluations of corrections on-eye. This report describes individualising optical and neural components of the VSX (visual Strehl) metric and evaluates personalisation using two clinical applications. (1) Better understanding visual experience: While VSX tracks visual performance in typical eyes, non-individualised metrics underestimated visual performance in highly aberrated eyes - could this be understood by personalising metrics? (2) Metric-optimised objective spherocylindrical refractions in typical and atypical eyes have used neural weighting functions of typical eyes - will personalisation affect the outcome in clinical 0.25D steps? METHODS: Orientation-specific neural contrast sensitivity was measured in four typical myopic and astigmatic eyes and six eyes with keratoconus. Wavefront error was measured in all eyes while uncorrected and when the keratoconic eyes wore wavefront-guided scleral lenses. Total experiment duration was 24-28 h per subject. Two versions of VSX were calculated for each application: one weighted ocular optics with measured neural contrast sensitivity data from that eye, another weighted optics with a representative neural function of typical eyes. Wavefront-guided corrections were evaluated using the two metric values. Spherocylindrical corrections that optimised each metric were identified. RESULTS: Metric values for keratoconic eyes improved by a mean factor of 1.99 (~0.3 log units) when personalised. Applying this factor to a larger sample of eyes from a previous keratoconus study reconciled dissonances between the percentage of eyes reaching normative best-corrected metric levels and the percentages of eyes reaching normative levels of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity. Spherocylindrical corrections that optimised both versions of VSX were clinically equivalent (mean ± SD Euclidean dioptric difference 0.13 ± 0.18 D). CONCLUSIONS: Personalising visual image quality metrics is beneficial when actual metric values are used (evaluating ophthalmic corrections on-eye against norms) and when fine increments in visual quality are imparted (wavefront-guided corrections). However, partially individualised metrics appear adequate when metrics relatively rank spherocylindrical corrections in 0.25 D steps.

A Randomized Trial of Objective Spectacle Prescriptions for Adults with Down Syndrome: Baseline Data and Methods.

SIGNIFICANCE: It is difficult to determine the most efficacious refractive correction for individuals with Down syndrome using routine clinical techniques. New objective methods that optimize spectacle corrections for this population may reduce limitations on daily living by improving visual quality. PURPOSE: This article describes the methods and baseline characteristics of study participants in a National Eye Institute-sponsored clinical trial to evaluate objectively derived spectacle corrections in adults with Down syndrome. Intersession repeatability of the primary outcome measure (distance visual acuity) is also reported. METHODS: Adults with Down syndrome were enrolled into a nine-visit study to compare clinically derived spectacle corrections and two different objective spectacle corrections derived from wavefront aberration data. Spectacle corrections were randomized and dispensed for 2 months each. Distance visual acuity was measured with a Bailey-Lovie-style chart. Intersession repeatability of acuity was established by performing difference versus mean analysis from binocular acuity measures obtained through habitual corrections at visits 1 and 2. RESULTS: Thirty adults (mean ± standard deviation age, 29 ± 10 years) with a large range of refractive errors were enrolled. Presenting visual acuity at visit 1 was reduced (right eye, 0.47 ± 0.20 logMAR; left eye, 0.42 ± 0.17 logMAR). The mean difference between visits 1 and 2 was 0.02 ± 0.06 logMAR, with a coefficient of repeatability (1.96 × within-subject standard deviation) of 0.12 logMAR. CONCLUSIONS: This study seeks to investigate new strategies to determine optical corrections that may reduce commonly observed visual deficits in individuals with Down syndrome. The good intersession repeatability of acuity found in this study (six letters) indicates that, despite the presence of reduced acuity, adults with Down syndrome performed the outcome measure for this clinical trial reliably.

Comparing the CamBlobs2 contrast sensitivity test to the near Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test in normally-sighted young adults.

PURPOSE: Contrast sensitivity (CS) has been proposed as a potential method for patients to assess their vision at home. The CamBlobs2 contrast sensitivity test is meant to be performed easily in the clinic or at home. The purpose of this study was to determine the intra-visit coefficient of repeatability of the CamBlobs2 compared with the near Pelli-Robson test, and the limits of agreement between these two tests on normally-sighted subjects. METHODS: Twenty-two normally-sighted subjects (mean age 28 ± 4 years) completed two trials of the near Pelli-Robson and CamBlobs2 contrast sensitivity tests within a single visit. Tests were performed monocularly on each eye in random order. Pelli-Robson tests were scored as 0.05 logCS for each letter read correctly after deducting the first triplet. CamBlob2 tests were scored as the highest line where two or fewer blobs were marked correctly. The coefficient of repeatability was determined as 1.96 times the standard deviation of the difference between the two measurements using the same type of chart on the same eye. The limits of agreement between the two tests were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: The mean difference between intra-visit measurements for both the near Pelli-Robson and CamBlobs2 was less than 0.05 logCS and the coefficient of repeatability was within ±0.20 log CS for both left and right eyes. The mean ± standard deviation differences between near Pelli-Robson and CamBlobs2 scores was -0.08 ± 0.08 (limits of agreement: -0.24 to 0.09) for right eyes and -0.05 ± 0.10 (limits of agreement: -0.23 to 0.14) logCS for left eyes based on average measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The intra-visit repeatability of CamBlobs2 was consistent with the near Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test (±0.20 logCS). With a 0.05 correction, the CamBlobs2 scores showed excellent agreement with the near Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test.

Greater higher order aberrations induced by toric orthokeratology versus soft toric multifocal contact lens wear.

PURPOSE: Spherical orthokeratology and soft multifocal contact lenses are commonly used for myopia control and correction, but have been shown to increase spherical aberration, coma and total higher order root mean square (HORMS) aberrations. There are limited myopia control contact lens options for patients with moderate to high astigmatism. The purpose of this study was to quantify changes in higher order aberrations (HOA) in myopic astigmatic eyes fitted with toric orthokeratology (TOK) and soft toric multifocal (STM) contact lenses. METHODS: Ocular wavefront aberrations were measured in both eyes of 30 adult subjects and are reported through the 6th radial order over a 5 mm, dilated pupil. All eyes met refractive criteria of myopia (-5.00 D to plano) and cylinder (-3.50 to -1.25 D). Three measurements were taken at baseline and after 10 ± 2 days of lens wear (TOK, STM). Sixteen subjects achieved logMAR high contrast visual acuity of 0.30 or better in both eyes and were included in this analysis. Repeated measures analysis of variance and post-hoc paired t-tests were used, as appropriate, with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. RESULTS: Higher order root mean square, spherical aberration (C12), and coma RMS (C7, C8) increased with TOK (0.641 [0.222], 0.409 [0.157], 0.426 [0.187] µm, respectively) and STM (0.481 [0.107], 0.223 [0.139], 0.320 [0.130] µm, respectively) from baseline (all p < 0.001). TOK was elevated compared to STM for HORMS (p = 0.03), spherical aberration (p = 0.001) and coma RMS (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Toric orthokeratology induced more HORMS, spherical aberration and coma RMS than STM in myopic astigmats; however, both lens types showed an increase in HOA compared to baseline, which placed patients outside the age and pupil size matched normative ranges. While the optical changes that accompany these modalities are helpful for myopia management, the induction of HOAs may have unintended consequences on visual performance.

Modeling refractive correction strategies in keratoconus.

This work intends to determine the optimal refractive spectacle and scleral lens corrections for keratoconus patients using the visual Strehl (VSX) visual image quality metric and the SyntEyes models with the synthetic biometry of 20 normal eyes and 20 keratoconic eyes. These included the corneal tomography and intraocular biometry. A series of virtual spherocylindrical spectacle and scleral lens corrections spanning the entire phoropter range were separately applied to each eye, followed by ray tracing to determine the residual wavefront aberrations and identify the correction with the highest possible VSX (named a "focus"). To speed up calculations, a smart scanning algorithm was used, consisting of three consecutive scans over increasingly finer dioptric grids. In the dioptric space, the VSX pattern for normal eyes considered over the correction range for either spectacle or scleral lens corrections resembled an hourglass with one distinct focus and a quick drop in VSX away from that focus. For 18 of the 20 keratoconic eyes, the spectacle-corrected VSX pattern resembled a shell that in 9 of the 20 cases showed two foci separated by a large dioptric distance (13.3 ± 4.9 diopters). In keratoconic eyes, scleral lenses also produced hourglass patterns, but with a VSX lower than in normal eyes. The hourglass pattern in dioptric space shows how, in normal eyes, the refracting process automatically funnels practitioners toward the optimal correction. The shell patterns in keratoconus, however, present far more complexity and, possibly, multiple foci. Depending on the starting point, refracting procedures may lead to a local maximum rather than the optimal correction.

Case Report: What Are We Doing for Our "20/20 Unhappy" Scleral Lens Patients?

SIGNIFICANCE: Scleral lenses (SLs) partially mask higher-order aberrations (HOAs) in highly aberrated eyes. Although visual acuity (VA) may show satisfactory quantitative clinical outcomes during SL wear, residual (uncorrected) HOAs can leave subjective visual quality goals unmet. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report a case where a "20/20 unhappy" patient with SLs was able to meet visual goals with wavefront-guided SLs. CASE REPORT: A 40-year-old male with bilateral keratoconus, whose Snellen VA with SLs was 20/20 right eye (OD) 20/16 left eye (OS), reported halos and glare at night and perceptual smearing. When viewing a point of light, a "Ferris wheel" shadowing was observed OD and a U-shaped shadowing OS. Residual higher-order root mean square wavefront error was 0.49 µm OD and 0.39 µm OS; visual image quality measured by visual Strehl ratio was 0.067 OD and 0.092 OS (pupil size, 4.00 mm). Wavefront-guided SLs reduced residual higher-order root mean square to 0.19 µm OD and 0.25 µm OS, VA improved to 20/10 OD and 20/13 OS, and visual Strehl improved to 0.150 OD and 0.121 OS. The patient reported reduced smearing, shadowing, and night vision concerns, meeting his visual expectations and goals. CONCLUSIONS: Wavefront sensing quantifies both lower and HOAs, which can cause visual dissatisfaction in individuals with highly aberrated eyes, despite sometimes reaching typical levels of VA. As wavefront-guided SLs targeting these residual aberrations to improve visual image quality become more available, they should be considered for 20/20 unhappy patients when conventional clinical options are unsatisfactory.

Do Polymer Coatings Change the Aberrations of Conventional and Wavefront-guided Scleral Lenses?

SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of this study indicate that patients could simultaneously be offered the individualized optical correction of wavefront-guided (WFG) lenses and the superior comfort afforded by polymer coatings. This could be helpful to patients with ectasia suffering ocular dryness or dependent on scleral lenses for lengthy periods of wear. PURPOSE: Wavefront-guided scleral lenses target lower- and higher-order aberrations of individual eyes using submicrometer-level contours in the anterior lens surface. Hydrophilic polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer coatings applied to lens surfaces improve comfort and wettability. This study aimed to quantify aberration changes (e.g., masking) when applying polymer coatings to WFG and conventional scleral lenses. METHODS: Two control lenses (remained uncoated) and 14 experimental lenses (two repeated builds of seven aberration designs: one spherical, two coma, four full WFG [second- to fifth-order aberrations]) were manufactured, and aberrations were measured (mean of three) by two operators before and after coating. Root mean square (RMS) and visual image quality (logVSX) differences were calculated for 6-mm diameters. RESULTS: Median RMS aberration change due to coating was 0.012 µm (range, 0.008 to 0.057 µm). Maximum logVSX change due to coating was 0.073, predicting an approximately one letter change in acuity. Instrument sensitivity was 0.002 µm. Acute instrument and operator variabilities (standard deviations of individual [second- to fifth-order Zernikes] were all <0.027 µm). Longitudinal variability (control lenses) was low: all less than 0.017 µm. Although RMS of differences between repeated builds of all lenses was less than 0.25 D and not statistically significant, relatively, manufacture constituted the major variability, and RMS difference between repeated builds was at least four times greater than the effect of coating (median, 0.167 µm; range, 0.088 to 0.312 µm). CONCLUSIONS: Application of polymer coatings caused measurable changes in aberrations of WFG and conventional scleral lenses; however, these were clinically and statistically insignificant and within variability of repeated lens manufacture. In their current states, WFG lenses and polymer coatings could be used simultaneously.

The Impact of Misaligned Wavefront-guided Correction in a Scleral Lens for the Highly Aberrated Eye.

SIGNIFICANCE: To achieve maximum visual benefit, wavefront-guided scleral lens corrections (WGCs) are aligned with the underlying wavefront error of each individual eye. This requirement adds complexity to the fitting process. With a view toward simplification in lens fitting, this study quantified the consequences of placing WGCs at two pre-defined locations. PURPOSE: This study aimed to quantify performance reduction accompanying the placement of the WGC at two locations: (1) the average decentered location (ADL; average decentration observed across individuals wearing scleral lenses) and (2) the geometric center (GC) of the lens. METHODS: Deidentified residual aberration and lens translation data from 36 conventional scleral lens-wearing eyes with corneal ectasia were used to simulate WGC correction in silico. The WGCs were decentered from the eye-specific pupil position to both the ADL and GC locations. The impact of these misalignments was assessed in terms of change (from the aligned, eye-specific pupil position) in higher-order root mean square (HORMS) wavefront error, change in log of the visual Strehl ratio (logVSX), and predicted change in logMAR visual acuity (VA). RESULTS: As expected, HORMS increased, logVSX decreased, and predicted VA was poorer at both ADL and GC compared with the aligned condition (P < .001). Thirty-four of 36 eyes had greater residual HORMS, and 33 of 36 eyes had worse logVSX values at the GC than at the ADL. In clinical terms, 19 of 36 eyes at the ADL and 35 of 36 eyes at the GC had a predicted loss in VA of three letters or greater. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of the WGC at either ADL or GC is predicted to lead to a noticeable reduction in VA for more than half of the eyes studied, suggesting the simplification of the fitting process is not worth the cost in performance.

Quantifying the Optical and Physical Consequences of Daily Cleaning on Conventional and Wavefront-guided Scleral Lenses.

SIGNIFICANCE: An equivalent 12 months of cleaning did not induce significant changes in the optical aberrations or base curves of scleral lenses. PURPOSE: This study aimed to test whether an equivalent of 12 months of manual cleaning alters the optical and physical properties of conventional and wavefront-guided scleral lenses. METHODS: Twelve scleral lenses (four repeats of three designs, termed A, B, and C) were manufactured in Boston XO material: design A, -5.00 D defocus; design B, -5.00 D defocus with -0.153-µm vertical coma; and design C, -5.00 D defocus with a full custom wavefront-guided correction (second to fifth Zernike radial orders) of an eye with severe keratoconus. One lens of each design group served as a control and was not cleaned. To simulate a year of cleaning, seven individuals cleaned nine lenses (three from each group) twice a day for 27 days using the palm technique and commercially available cleaners, resulting in 378 cleanings of each lens. Lens aberrations were optically profiled and base curve radii were measured at baseline and after every 42nd cleaning. Differences in higher-order root mean square (HORMS) wavefront error and base curve radii associated with cleaning were compared with clinical benchmarks and using sign tests. RESULTS: For the experimental lenses, median change in Seidel spherical dioptric power was +0.01 D (maximum, +0.025 D). Median change in HORMS wavefront error was 0.013 µm (maximum, 0.019 µm). All lenses exhibited HORMS changes less than one-eighth equivalent diopters (P = .002). Median percentage change in HORMS wavefront error in the three wavefront-guided lenses was 0.96% (maximum, 1.25%). Median change in base curve radii was 0.00 mm, with all lenses exhibiting changes (P = .002), less than the American National Standards Institute tolerance of 0.05 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Cleaning over an equivalent 12-month period did not induce clinically significant changes in the optical or base curve properties of conventional or wavefront-guided scleral lenses.

Visual interaction of 2nd to 5th order Zernike aberration terms with vertical coma.

PURPOSE: In order to better understand the optical consequence of residual aberrations during conventional rigid contact lens wear in keratoconus, this study aimed to quantify the visual interaction between positive vertical coma (C(3, -1)) and other individual 2nd to 5th radial order Zernike aberration terms. METHODS: The experiment proceeded in two parts. First, two levels of C(3, -1) (target term) were simulated. Individual Zernike aberration terms from the 2nd to 5th radial orders (test terms) were combined in 0.05-µm steps a) from -2.00 µm to +2.00 µm with +1.00 µm of C(3, -1) and b) from -1.00 µm to +1.00 µm with +0.50 µm of C(3, -1). The resulting combinations were used to calculate the logarithm of the visual Strehl ratio (logVSX) and predict the relative beneficial or deleterious impact of the interaction. Second, for test terms where an interaction was predicted to provide more than a 0.25 logVSX benefit compared to C(3, -1) alone, high contrast logMAR acuity charts were constructed (simulating the manner in which the test + target term combinations would impact the retinal image of the chart), and randomly read by three well-corrected, typically-sighted individuals through a 3.0-mm diameter artificial pupil. RESULTS: When combined with positive C(3, -1), C(3, -3), C(4, -4), C(5, -5), C(5, -3), and C(5, -1) exhibited better visual image quality compared with C(3, -1) alone. Ratios of the test terms to target term providing maximal benefit remained constant for both +0.50 µm and +1.00 µm of C(3, -1). C(3, -3) and C(5, -1) had the largest predicted beneficial effect, with the maximal effect for +1.00 µm of C(3, -1) occurring with +0.35 µm of C(5, -1) and -1.00 µm of C(3, -3). When individuals read letter charts convolved with the point spread function derived from C(3, -1) combined with C(3, -3) and C(3, -1) combined with C(5, -1), the maximal beneficial effect was 0.27 logMAR (13.5 letters) for C(3, -3) and 0.36 logMAR (18 letters) for C(5, -1). CONCLUSIONS: While most interactions reduced visual image quality, combinations of C(3, -3) (vertical trefoil) and C(5, -1) (vertical secondary coma) provided a clinically relevant beneficial effect in the presence of C(3, -1) (vertical coma) which was demonstrated in both through-focus simulation and chart reading tests. Future work will examine whether these effects persist in the presence of the entire spectrum of residual aberrations seen in the eyes of individuals with keratoconus.

Combining optical and neural components in physiological visual image quality metrics as functions of luminance and age.

Visual image quality metrics combine comprehensive descriptions of ocular optics (from wavefront error) with a measure of the neural processing of the visual system (neural contrast sensitivity). To improve the ability of these metrics to track real-world changes in visual performance and to investigate the roles and interactions of those optical and neural components in foveal visual image quality as functions of age and target luminance, models of neural contrast sensitivity were constructed from the literature as functions of (1) retinal illuminance (Trolands, td), and (2) retinal illuminance and age. These models were then incorporated into calculation of the visual Strehl ratio (VSX). Best-corrected VSX values were determined at physiological pupil sizes over target luminances of 104 to 10-3 cd/m2 for 146 eyes spanning six decades of age. Optical and neural components of the metrics interact and contribute to visual image quality in three ways. At target luminances resulting in >900 td at physiological pupil size, neural processing is constant, and only aberrations (that change as pupil size changes with luminance) affect the metric. At low mesopic luminances below where pupil size asymptotes to maximum, optics are constant (maximum pupil), and only the neural component changes with luminance. Between these two levels, both optical and neural components of the metrics are affected by changes in target luminance. The model that accounted for both retinal illuminance and age allowed VSX, termed VSX(td,a), to best track visual acuity trends (measured at 160 and 200 cd/m2) as a function of age (20s through 70s) from the literature. Best-corrected VSX(td,a) decreased by 2.24 log units between maximum and minimum target luminances in the youngest eyes and by 2.58 log units in the oldest. The decrease due to age was more gradual at high target luminances (0.70 log units) and more pronounced as target luminance decreased (1.04 log units).

Application of Topographical Keratoconus Detection Metrics to Eyes of Individuals with Down Syndrome.

SIGNIFICANCE: The challenges associated with clinical assessment of individuals with Down syndrome contribute to a wide range of estimates on the prevalence of keratoconus in the Down syndrome population. This work focuses on two topographical indices previously identified with keratoconus detection, applying them to a topographical data set meeting strict sampling criteria. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the level of keratoconus-like topographical morphology in a large sample of eyes from individuals with Down syndrome, as identified by two keratoconus detection metrics: inferior-superior dioptric asymmetry (I-S) and KISA%. Severity of the asymmetry was also cast within the context of established Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus study disease severity classification criteria. METHODS: Corneal topography data on both eyes of 140 subjects with Down syndrome and 138 control subjects were collected. Both I-S and KISA% were calculated from the topography data of eyes with sufficient sampling. Steep and flat keratometry data are reported for subjects with measurements on both eyes in the context of values recorded by the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus study in frank keratoconus to examine within-eye and between-eye asymmetry and severity. RESULTS: Keratoconus detection thresholds were exceeded in 20.8% of the eyes of subjects with Down syndrome and 2.2% of the eyes of controls using I-S and 11.8% of the eyes of subjects with Down syndrome and 0.0% of the eyes of controls using KISA%. Examination of the level of intraeye difference between flat and steep keratometry data for individuals with Down syndrome detected as having corneal morphology consistent with moderate keratoconus yields an average of 1.81 D of toricity, whereas the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus study reported 3.28 D of toricity. CONCLUSIONS: Morphology consistent with keratoconus as codified in the detection metrics I-S and KISA% is present in a large percentage of the eyes of individuals with Down syndrome. Differences were observed in the distribution of severity of corneal morphology in individuals with Down syndrome and the keratoconus population at large.

Comparison of Wavefront-guided and Best Conventional Scleral Lenses after Habituation in Eyes with Corneal Ectasia.

SIGNIFICANCE: Visual performance with wavefront-guided (WFG) contact lenses has only been reported immediately after manufacture without time for habituation, and comparison has only been made with clinically unrefined predicate conventional lenses. We present comparisons of habitual corrections, best conventional scleral lenses, and WFG scleral lenses after habituation to all corrections. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare, in a crossover design, optical and visual performance of eyes with corneal ectasias wearing dispensed best conventional scleral lens corrections and dispensed individualized WFG scleral lens corrections. METHODS: Ten subjects (20 eyes) participated in a randomized crossover study where best conventional scleral lenses and WFG scleral lenses (customized through the fifth radial order) were worn for 8 weeks each. These corrections, as well as each subject's habitual correction and normative data for normal eyes, were compared using (1) residual higher-order aberrations (HORMS), (2) visual acuity (VA), (3) letter contrast sensitivity (CS), and (4) visual image quality (logarithm of the visual Strehl ratio, or logVSX). Correlations were performed between Pentacam biometric measures and gains provided by WFG lenses. RESULTS: Mean HORMS was reduced by 48% from habitual to conventional and 43% from conventional to WFG. Mean logMAR VA improved from habitual (+0.12) to conventional (-0.03) and further with WFG (-0.09); six eyes gained greater than one line with WFG over conventional. Area under the CS curve improved by 26% from habitual to conventional and 14% from conventional to WFG. The percentage of the eyes achieving normal levels were as follows: HORMS, 40% for conventional and 85% for WFG; VA, 50% for conventional and 85% for WFG; and CS, 60% for conventional and 90% for WFG. logVSX improved by 16% from habitual to conventional and 25% further with WFG. Reduction in aberrations with WFG lenses best correlated with posterior cornea radius of curvature. CONCLUSIONS: Visual performance was superior to that reported with nonhabituated WFG lens wear. With WFG lenses, HORMS and logVSX significantly improved, allowing more eyes to reach normal levels of optical and visual performance compared with conventional lenses.

Normative best-corrected values of the visual image quality metric VSX as a function of age and pupil size.

The visual image quality metric the visual Strehl ratio (VSX) combines a comprehensive description of the optics of an eye (wavefront error) with an estimate of the photopic neural processing of the visual system, and has been shown to be predictive of subjective best focus and well correlated with change in visual performance. Best-corrected visual image quality was determined for 146 eyes, and the quantitative relation of VSX, age, and pupil size is presented, including 95% confidence interval norms for age groups between 20 and 80 years and pupil diameters from 3 to 7 mm. These norms were validated using an independently collected population of wavefront error measurements. The best visual image quality was found in young eyes at smaller pupil sizes. Increasing pupil size caused a more rapid decrease in VSX than increasing age. These objectively determined benchmarks represent the best theoretical levels of visual image quality achievable with a sphere, cylinder, and axis correction in normal eyes and can be used to evaluate both traditional and wavefront-guided optical corrections provided by refractive surgery, contact lenses, and spectacles.

Repeatability of Monocular Acuity Testing in Adults with and without Down Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Individuals with Down syndrome may experience greater difficulty reliably performing visual acuity (VA) tests because of intellectual disability and limitations in visual quality. This study evaluated the repeatability of acuity (Bailey-Lovie [BL] and HOTV) in subjects with and without Down syndrome. METHODS: High-contrast VA was measured in both eyes of 30 subjects with Down syndrome (mean, 30 years; range, 18 to 50 years) and 24 control subjects without Down syndrome (mean, 29 years; range, 18 to 50 years). In the Down syndrome group, 23 subjects performed BL, and 7 subjects performed HOTV. All control subjects performed both BL and HOTV, but for HOTV analysis, only seven age-matched control subjects were included. For each eye, subjects performed VA three times on different charts (computer controlled, single-line display) until five total letters were missed on each chart. A repeated-measure ANOVA was used to compare the acuity measures between groups. RESULTS: The average logMAR VA for subjects with Down syndrome was approximately six lines worse than the control subjects (BL: Down syndrome = right eye: 0.51 ± 0.16, left eye: 0.53 ± 0.18; control = right eye: -0.06 ± 0.06, left eye: -0.06 ± 0.08, P < .0001; HOTV: Down syndrome = right eye: 0.47 ± 0.19, left eye: 0.46 ± 0.16; control: right eye = -0.11 ± 0.09, left eye: -0.07 ± 0.07, P < .001). Bailey-Lovie VA repeatability (1.96 * Sw * √2) was 0.13 logMAR (6.5 letters) for Down syndrome and 0.09 logMAR (4.5 letters) for control subjects. HOTV VA repeatability was 0.16 logMAR (eight letters) for both Down syndrome and control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Despite poorer acuity in individuals with Down syndrome, repeatability of VA measurements was comparable to control subjects for both BL and HOTV techniques.

Objective measurement of spectacle wear with a temperature sensor data logger.

PURPOSE: This study seeks to establish the utility of the SmartButton Data Logger (www.acrsystems.com) to monitor spectacle wear for research and clinical applications. METHODS: Fifty adults wore a thermosensor on their spectacles for 2 weeks for each of two mount types while keeping wear-time logs. Temperatures during reported spectacle wear (ON) were compared to temperatures during non-wear (OFF) with repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). In addition, two strategies to approximate spectacle wear from temperature data were evaluated: (1) Filtering data based on temperature ranges to identify spectacle wear (either group mean ON temperature, or an individual's mean ON temperature), and (2) Separate examiners inspecting temperature against time plots to identify spectacle wear. The success of these methods to approximate wear time was evaluated by per cent error with respect to subject reported wear time. RESULTS: Group mean ON (31.8 [0.6]°Celsius [°C]) and OFF (24.7 [1.5]°C) temperatures differed significantly (F1,47  = 471.2, p < 0.001), but there was no difference in temperature between mounts (F1,47  = 1.9, p = 0.18). Median per cent error and first and third quartiles (Q1, Q3) of each technique used to approximate wear time were: group mean filtering = 8% (Q1 3%, Q3 18%), individual mean filtering = 7% (Q1 4%, Q3 19%), Examiner 1 = 6% (Q1 2%, Q3 14%), Examiner 2 = 7% (Q1 3%, Q3 12%). CONCLUSIONS: The SmartButton can monitor spectacle compliance in patients with all approximation methods evaluated providing less than 10% median per cent error in wear time.