Optometry & Visual Performance (OVP) Journal
Contact Us
  • Home
  • Editorial Team
  • OVP Journal Issues
  • OVP Blog
  • Visual Performance Today
  • Advertising
    • Advertiser Bio Sketches
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submission of Articles

Effect of Bifocal and Prismatic Bifocal Spectacles on Myopia Progression in Children

6/3/2014

3 Comments

 
Cheng D, Woo GC, Drobe B, Schmid KL.

JAMA Ophthalmology 2014;132(3):258-64

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24435660

Reviewed by Dr. Marc Taub; Memphis, Tennessee

Eye care providers are constantly bombarded with questions from parents related to the progression of their children’s myopia. They demand to know how high the prescription will reach, will the children need new glasses every year, and what can be done to stop the myopia from getting worse. They do not want their children wearing Coke-bottle glasses! There are numerous theories concerning the cause of myopia progression and just as many treatments. Eye care providers have studied hard contact lenses, orthokeratology, under-minusing with glasses, bifocal glasses with high add powers, and multifocal contact lenses. Some studies show positive gains with each of these treatments, while others show the opposite. In this study, the authors examined the progression of myopia comparing bifocal glasses to bifocal glasses with prism. 


A total of 135 (73 female and 62 male) Chinese-Canadian children, aged 8-13 years, with myopia progression of at least 0.50 D in the preceding year were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatments. A total of 128 (94.8%) completed the trial. The mean amount of subject myopia was -3.08 +/-0.10 D. The treatment groups were as follows: Single-vision lenses (control, n = 41), +1.50 D executive bifocals (n = 48), and +1.50 D executive bifocals with 3Δ base-in prism in the near segment of each lens (n = 46). The bifocals used were custom-made polycarbonate executive bifocals with a front curve of +3.25 (Essilor).  The add and prism powers were chosen based on outcomes of a previous study in Chinese-Canadian children. The +1.50 D add power reduced the accommodative lag but did not induce a large amount of near exophoria. The 6Δ base-in prism reduced the lens-induced exophoria to close to zero. The primary outcome was myopia progression measured using an automated refractor following Cycloplegia. A secondary outcome was increase in axial length measured using ultrasonography at intervals of 6 months for 36 months. Accommodative lag and near phoria were also assessed. 

Myopia progression over 3 years was an average of -2.06 +/-0.13 D for the single-vision lens group, -1.25 +/-0.10 D for the bifocal group, and -1.01 +/-0.13 D for the prismatic bifocal group. The treatment effect of bifocals (0.81 D) and prismatic bifocals (1.05 D), compared to the single-vision lens group was significant (P < .001). There was no significant difference between the two bifocal designs (P=0.15). Axial length increased an average of 0.82 +/-0.05 mm for the single-vision lens group, 0.57 +/-0.07 mm for the bifocal group, and 0.54 +/-0.06 mm for the prismatic bifocal group. Both bifocal groups had less axial elongation (0.25 mm and 0.28 mm, respectively) than the single-vision lens group (P < .001). 

For children with high lags of accommodation (≥ 1.01 D), the treatment effect of both bifocals and prismatic bifocals was similar (1.1 D) (P < .001). For children with low lags (<1.01 D), the treatment effect of prismatic bifocals (0.99 D) was greater than of bifocals (0.50 D) (P = .03). The treatment effect of both bifocals and prismatic bifocals was independent of the near phoria status.

Multiple linear regression analysis showed that age (higher progression with lower age, P<.001), baseline myopia progression (higher progression with higher baseline myopia progression, P=0.03), and parental myopia (higher progression the greater the number of myopic parents, P=0.04) were associated with the magnitude of treatment effect.

Both bifocals and prismatic bifocals were found to significantly inhibit myopia progression in children compared to single-vision lenses within the three-year treatment period.  Bifocal spectacles slowed myopia progression in children with an annual progression rate of at least 0.50 D after 3 years. The greatest impact was found in the first year of treatment but held steady throughout the treatment period. This study adds fuel to the fire for behavioral optometrists who routinely prescribe bifocal spectacles, either with or without prism, with the sole purpose of retarding myopia progression. While mainstream optometry puts down this practice, this randomized clinical trial directly refutes their disdain.   
3 Comments
Masud
7/20/2014 05:20:37 am

I believed in this article as I am a parent with 3 lovely daughters. Tablet games are not bad they can learn from it and since you can sometimes install an app to limit and control their playing time such as Screentime Ninja. In this app you can limit what time they can start playing if their time credit expires and they still want to earn more playing time they have to solve a math problem to gain extra playing time. Its great huh? Yeah I am using this app and I find it useful and helpful for me as I am a busy mom who has a day job and I can’t monitor them every hour. :)
Here’s the link : https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=screentime.ninja&referrer=utm_source%3DEva

Reply
Masud
7/20/2014 05:21:04 am

I believed in this article as I am a parent with 3 lovely daughters. Tablet games are not bad they can learn from it and since you can sometimes install an app to limit and control their playing time such as Screentime Ninja. In this app you can limit what time they can start playing if their time credit expires and they still want to earn more playing time they have to solve a math problem to gain extra playing time. Its great huh? Yeah I am using this app and I find it useful and helpful for me as I am a busy mom who has a day job and I can’t monitor them every hour. :)
Here’s the link : https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=screentime.ninja&referrer=utm_source%3DEva

Reply
Susannah
1/8/2015 09:32:53 am

Why does mainstream optometry oppose bifocal lenses despite their improved retardation of myopic progression from single vision lenses? I'm writing a thesis of myopic progression and different forms of treatment and I would like to know the reasoning behind ophthalmologists who continue to prescribe single vision lenses.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    June 2020
    November 2019
    April 2019
    October 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    January 2018
    September 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    September 2015
    August 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    Article Review
    Meeting Review
    Video Interview

Picture

 
Picture
© 2022 Optometry & Visual Performance (OVP) Journal
All rights reserved.