Global trends in myopia management attitudes and strategies in clinical practice - 2019 Update.

PURPOSE: A survey in 2015 identified a high level of eye care practitioner concern about myopia with a reported moderately high level of activity, but the vast majority still prescribed single vision interventions to young myopes. This research aimed to update these findings 4 years later. METHODS: A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire was distributed in eight languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questions examined: awareness of increasing myopia prevalence, perceived efficacy of available strategies and adoption levels of such strategies, and reasons for not adopting specific strategies. RESULTS: Of the 1336 respondents, concern was highest (9.0 ±â€¯1.6; p < 0.001) in Asia and lowest (7.6 ±â€¯2.2; p < 0.001) in Australasia. Practitioners from Asia also considered their clinical practice of myopia control to be the most active (7.7 ±â€¯2.3; p < 0.001), the North American practitioners being the least active (6.3 ±â€¯2.9; p < 0.001). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by pharmaceutical approaches and approved myopia control soft contact lenses (p < 0.001). Although significant intra-regional differences existed, overall, most practitioners did not consider single-vision distance under-correction to be an effective strategy for attenuating myopia progression (79.6 %), but prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary mode of correction for myopic patients (63.6 ±â€¯21.8 %). The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe alternatives to single vision refractive corrections were increased cost (20.6 %) and inadequate information (17.6 %). CONCLUSIONS: While practitioner concern about myopia and the reported level of activity have increased over the last 4 years, the vast majority of eye care clinicians still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. With recent global consensus evidence-based guidelines having been published, it is hoped that this will inform the practice of myopia management in future.

IMI - Clinical Management Guidelines Report.

Best practice clinical guidelines for myopia control involve an understanding of the epidemiology of myopia, risk factors, visual environment interventions, and optical and pharmacologic treatments, as well as skills to translate the risks and benefits of a given myopia control treatment into lay language for both the patient and their parent or caregiver. This report details evidence-based best practice management of the pre-, stable, and the progressing myope, including risk factor identification, examination, selection of treatment strategies, and guidelines for ongoing management. Practitioner considerations such as informed consent, prescribing off-label treatment, and guides for patient and parent communication are detailed. The future research directions of myopia interventions and treatments are discussed, along with the provision of clinical references, resources, and recommendations for continuing professional education in this growing area of clinical practice.

Role of corneal biomechanical properties in predicting of speed of myopic progression in children wearing orthokeratology lenses or single-vision spectacles.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the characteristics of children who were likely to progress rapidly and gain the greatest benefit from orthokeratology (ortho-k) treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The files of 113 children who participated in two myopia control studies and wore either ortho-k lenses (n=62) or single-vision spectacles (SVS) (n=51) were reviewed. Baseline cycloplegic subjective refraction, central corneal thickness, axial length, keratometry, intraocular pressure, corneal biomechanical properties and 24-month axial length data were retrieved and analysed. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that there was significant negative correlation between axial elongation and baseline age and corneal hysteresis (p<0.05) in the SVS group. In the ortho-k group, only baseline age was significantly and negatively associated with axial elongation (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Corneal biomechanical properties and baseline age can predict the rate of axial elongation in myopic children. It may be beneficial for younger myopic children with low corneal hysteresis to commence ortho-k treatment as early as possible.

Global trends in myopia management attitudes and strategies in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: Myopia is a global public health issue; however, no information exists as to how potential myopia retardation strategies are being adopted globally. METHODS: A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire was distributed in six languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questions examined: awareness of increasing myopia prevalence, perceived efficacy and adoption of available strategies, and reasons for not adopting specific strategies. RESULTS: Of the 971 respondents, concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than in any other continent (7/10, p<0.001) and they considered themselves more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10) than Australasia and Europe (7/10), with North (4/10) and South America (5/10) being least proactive (p<0.001). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, with under-correction and single vision spectacles felt to be the least effective (p<0.05). Although significant intra-regional differences existed, overall most practitioners 67.5 (±37.8)% prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary mode of correction for myopic patients. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe alternatives to single vision refractive corrections were increased cost (35.6%), inadequate information (33.3%) and the unpredictability of outcomes (28.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of practitioners' awareness of the efficacy of myopia control techniques, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia management need to be established.

Is Pupil Diameter Influenced by Refractive Error?

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between pupil diameter and refractive error and how refractive correction, target luminance, and accommodation modulate this relationship. METHODS: Sixty emmetropic, myopic, and hyperopic subjects (age range, 18 to 35 years) viewed an illuminated target (luminance: 10, 100, 200, 400, 1000, 2000, and 4100 cd/m) within a Badal optical system, at 0 diopters (D) and -3 D vergence, with and without refractive correction. Refractive error was corrected using daily disposable contact lenses. Pupil diameter and accommodation were recorded continuously using a commercially available photorefractor. RESULTS: No significant difference in pupil diameter was found between the refractive groups at 0 D or -3 D target vergence, in the corrected or uncorrected conditions. As expected, pupil diameter decreased with increasing luminance. Target vergence had no significant influence on pupil diameter. In the corrected condition, at 0 D target vergence, the accommodation response was similar in all refractive groups. At -3 D target vergence, the emmetropic and myopic groups accommodated significantly more than the hyperopic group at all luminance levels. There was no correlation between accommodation response and pupil diameter or refractive error in any refractive group. In the uncorrected condition, the accommodation response was significantly greater in the hyperopic group than in the myopic group at all luminance levels, particularly for near viewing. In the hyperopic group, the accommodation response was significantly correlated with refractive error but not pupil diameter. In the myopic group, accommodation response level was not correlated with refractive error or pupil diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Refractive error has no influence on pupil diameter, irrespective of refractive correction or accommodative demand. This suggests that the pupil is controlled by the pupillary light reflex and is not driven by retinal blur.