Refractive changes in soft contact lens corrected pediatric patients with progressive myopia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31288/Ukr.j.ophthalmol.202637680Keywords:
refractive errors, myopia, differential diagnosis, herical equivalent refraction progression gradient, optometry, cyber-ophthalmologyAbstract
Purpose: To assess the annual gradient of myopia progression in soft contact lens (SCL) corrected myopic children of various age groups.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1380 SCL-corrected patients (1380 eyes; 378 boys and 1084 girls) aged 6 to 17 years who had been examined during routine optometric visits. Follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 36 months. Patients were divided into age groups of 6-8 years (14 individuals), 9-11 years (52 individuals), 12-14 years (230 individuals), and 15-17 years (1084 individuals). In the presence of anisometropia, the more myopic eye was chosen as the study eye. Low myopia (-0.50 to -3.00 D) was found in 278 eyes, moderate myopia (-3.25 to -6.00 D), in 278 eyes, and high myopia (≤ -6.00 D), in 445 eyes. Astigmatism did not exceed 1.50 D. The progression of myopia was determined based on the spherical equivalent refraction (SER) values. SER was measured by non-cycloplegic autorefraction during routine optometric visits.
Results: The annual gradient of myopia progression for the 6-8 year group was 0.60 ± 0.53 D, for the 9-11 year group, 0.49 ± 0.15 D, for the 12-14 year group, 0.47 ± 0.06 D, and for the 15-17 year group, 0.26 ± 0.03 D (p < 0.05 for each).
Conclusion: The study findings on the annual gradient of myopia progression for various age groups of SCL-corrected children may be used for assessing the efficacy of interventions for slowing myopia progression.
References
Holden BA, Fricke TR, Wilson DA, Jong M, Naidoo KS, Sankaridurg P, et al. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(5):1036-42.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.006
Grzybowski A, Kanclerz P, Tsubota K, Lanca С, Saw SM. A review on the epidemiology of myopia in school children worldwide. BMC Ophthalmology. 2020;20(1):27.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-019-1220-0
Lawrenson JG, Huntjens B, Virgili G, Ng S, Dhakal R, Downie LE, et al. Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network metaanalysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Feb 13;2025(2):CD014758.https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014758.pub3
Gur'yanov VG, Lyakh YuE, Parii VD, et al. [Assessing model quality and adequacy. In: Gur'yanov VG, Lyakh YuE, Parii VD, et al. [Handbook of biostatistics. Analysis of the results of medical research in the EZR (R-statistics) package]. Kyiv: Vistka; 2018. Ukrainain.
Chaimani A, Salanti G. Visualizing assumptions and results in network meta-analysis: the network graphs package. Stata J. 2015;15(4):905-50.https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1501500402
Salanti G. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3(2):80-97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1037
Donovan L, Sankaridurg P, Ho A, Naduvilath T, Smith EL 3rd, Holden BA. Myopia progression rates in urban children wearing single-vision spectacles. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(1):27-32.https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182357f79
Brennan NA, Toubouti YM, Cheng X, Bullimore MA. Efficacy in myopia control. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2021;83:100923.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100923
Walline JJ, Jones LA, Sinnott L, et al. A randomized trial of the effect of soft contact lenses on myopia progression in children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:4702-4706.https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.08-2067
Bullimore MA. The safety of soft contact lenses in children. Optom Vis Sci. 2017;94:638-646.https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000001078
Bailey IL. Perspective: visual acuity - keeping it clear. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89:1247-1248.https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e318269926f
Sankaridurg P, He X, Naduvilath T, et al. Comparison of noncycloplegic and cycloplegic autorefraction in categorizing refractive error data in children. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017;95:e633-e640.https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.13569
Pesudovs K, Parker KE, Cheng H, Applegate RA. The precision of wavefront refraction compared to participantive refraction and autorefraction. Optom Vis Sci. 2007;84:387-392.https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e31804f81a9
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Shkribliak I. I., Shargorodska I. V., Dr Kriuchko O.V.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) that allows users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author as long as they cite the source.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors hold copyright immediately after publication of their works and retain publishing rights without any restrictions.
- The copyright commencement date complies the publication date of the issue, where the article is included in.
DEPOSIT POLICY
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) during the editorial process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Post-print (post-refereeing manuscript version) and publisher's PDF-version self-archiving is allowed.
- Archiving the pre-print (pre-refereeing manuscript version) not allowed.
