Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Feb 1;72(Suppl 2):S229-S232.
doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_628_23. Epub 2023 Dec 15.

Impact of soft and rigid gas-permeable contact lenses on visual performance in mesopic conditions

Iva Krolo  1   2 , Aida Kasumović Bećirević  1   3 , Ivana Radman  1 , Ivan Sabol  4 , Maja Malenica Ravlić  1 , Mirko Ratković  5 , Mirna Belovari  6
Affiliations

Impact of soft and rigid gas-permeable contact lenses on visual performance in mesopic conditions

Iva Krolo et al. Indian J Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Context: Evaluation of visual quality in soft and rigid gas-permeable contact lens wearers, with an emphasis on twilight vision.

Purpose: To assess the visual acuity and visual performance at dusk before and after soft and rigid gas-permeable contact lens (CL) correction in healthy subjects.

Settings and design: This prospective study was conducted in a tertiary eye-care center.

Methods: Sixty eyes corrected with soft contact lenses (SCLs) and 30 eyes with rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) were enrolled in this study. Patients underwent corrected distance visual acuity with spectacles (CDVAs), corrected distance visual acuity with contact lenses (CDVAcl), and twilight vision (TV) testing (Vista Vision Far-Pola, DMD MedTech charts). Parameters were evaluated before and after the CL fitting and repeated 3 months after the baseline visit.

Statistical analysis used: MedCalc for Windows, version 11.4 (MedCalc Software, Ostend, Belgium).

Results: Rigid gas-permeable CL wear showed significant improvement in CDVAcl compared to wearing spectacles on both visits ( P = 0.0039 and P = 0.0003, respectively). TV with CLs was significantly better in both groups compared to the TV with spectacles at the baseline visit ( P = 0.0011 in SCL group; P = 0.0001 in RGPCL group), and at the follow-up visit, this significance was proven for the RGPCL group ( P = 0.001). Also, spectacle TV showed a significant improvement on the follow-up visit ( P = 0.0022 in SCL group; P = 0.0269 in RGPCL group).

Conclusion: Contact lens wear improves visual performance compared to spectacles. TV results showed superiority of CLs compared to the spectacles, without a statistical difference regarding the CL type.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Johnson TJ, Schnider CM. Clinical performance and patient preferences for hydrogel versus RGP lenses:A crossover study. Int Contact Lens Clin. 1991;18:130–5.
    1. Timberlake GT, Doane MG, Bertera JH. Short-term, low-contrast visual acuity reduction associated with in vivo contact lens drying. Optom Vis Sci. 1992;69:755–60. - PubMed
    1. Fonn D, Gauthier CA, Pritchard N. Patient preferences and comparative ocular responses to rigid and soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1995;72:857–63. - PubMed
    1. Iskeleli G, Onur U, Ustundag C, Ozkan S. Comparison of corneal thickness of long-term contact lens wearers for different types of contact lenses. Eye Contact Lens. 2006;32:219–22. - PubMed
    1. Papas E, Wolffsohn JS, Jones L. Inovation in contact lenses:Basic research and clinical science. J Optom. 2010;3:123.

LinkOut - more resources