Clinical Outcomes of a Randomized Trial with Contact Lenses for Astigmatic Myopia Management

Abstract

ABSTRACT SIGNIFICANCE There are limited treatment options for myopia management of patients with moderate to high astigmatism. This work directly compares toric orthokeratology and soft toric multifocal lenses to show differences in visual acuity and patient satisfaction that could impact clinical care. Toric orthokeratology caused reduced visual acuity but was preferred subjectively for vision and overall. PURPOSE This study aimed to quantify objective and subjective clinical differences between toric orthokeratology and soft toric multifocal contact lenses in the same cohort of myopic wearers with moderate to high astigmatism. METHODS Thirty adults with refractive myopia (plano to −5.00 D) and astigmatism (1.25 to 3.50 D) were fitted empirically with both toric orthokeratology and soft toric multifocal contact lenses. Participants wore lenses for 10 days in random order, separated by a 14-day washout period. High-contrast visual acuity, low-contrast visual acuity, and glare logMAR visual acuity were measured. Surveys ascertained subject preference for comfort, vision, handling, and cost. Friedman, Wilcoxon signed rank, and χ 2 tests were performed. RESULTS A subset of participants (n = 17) who achieved good vision with both lens types was analyzed. High-contrast and glare acuity with toric orthokeratology were reduced by one line compared with soft toric multifocal lenses (both 0.00 vs. −0.10, P ≤ .003). Participants preferred toric orthokeratology for vision (P ≤ .03) but soft toric multifocal lenses for handling (P ≤ .006). When forced to choose between lens types, participants preferred toric orthokeratology for vision and overall (both P ≤ .007). CONCLUSIONS Participants who achieved good vision with both lens types preferred toric orthokeratology over soft toric multifocal lenses, despite reduced high-contrast and glare visual acuity. Further research is needed to understand the relationship between visual performance and patient satisfaction.