Person: Ruiz Pomeda, Alicia
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Faculty / Institute
Óptica y Optometría
Optometría y Visión
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- PublicationBinocular and accommodative function in the controlled randomized clinical trial MiSight® Assessment Study Spain (MASS)(Springer, 2019-01-28) Ruiz Pomeda, Alicia; Pérez Sánchez, Belén; Cañadas Suárez, Pilar; Prieto Garrido, Francisco Luis; Gutiérrez Ortega, Ángel Ramón; Villa Collar, CésarPurpose: To evaluate the binocular and accommodative function in children wearing dual focus (DF) MiSight® contact lenses (CLs) for myopia control compared with children wearing single-vision (SV) spectacles. Methods: This was a randomized, controlled clinical trial involving subjects aged 8 to 12, with myopia ranging from − 0.75 to − 4.00D and astigmatism < 1.00D, allocated to MiSight® study CLs group or control group wearing SV. Binocular and accommodative function was determined at baseline, 12-, and 24-month visits, assessed by the following sequence of tests: distance and near horizontal phoria, accommodative convergence/accommodation (AC/A) ratio, stereopsis, accommodative amplitude (AA), and accommodative response (AR) at 33, 25 and 20 cm. Results: Seventy-four children completed the study: 41 in the CL group and 33 in the SV group. CLs group did not show any significant differences in binocular and accommodative measurements throughout the study. In control group, distance and near phoria, stereopsis, AC/A and AR at 20 cm did not show any significant change, but AA, AR at 33 cm and AR at 25 cm were greater at 24-month visit compared with baseline (p < 0.05). Conclusions: DF lenses do not change the binocular and accommodative function in children wearing dual focus CLs. Trial registration: NCT01917110
- PublicationMiSight Assessment Study Spain (MASS). A 2-year randomized clinical trial(Springer, 2018-02-03) Ruiz Pomeda, Alicia; Pérez Sánchez, Belén; Valls Ferran, Isabel; Prieto Garrido, Francisco Luis; Gutiérrez Ortega, Ángel Ramón; Villa Collar, CésarPurpose: To compare myopia progression in children randomized to MiSight contact lenses (CLs) versus children corrected with single-vision spectacles (SV) over a 2-year period. Methods: Subjects aged 8 to 12 with myopia (−0.75 to −4.00 D sphere) and astigmatism (< −1.00 D cylinder) were assigned to the lens study group (MiSight) or the control group (single vision). Measurements of visual acuity and subjective refraction were taken at 6-month intervals, and axial length, anterior chamber, corneal power, and cycloplegic autorefraction were measured at the baseline, 12-month, and 24-month visits. Results: Eighty-nine subjects were recruited. Forty-fix children were assigned to the MiSight group, and 33 to the single-vision spectacle group. In total, 74 children completed the clinical trial, with the following parameters at the beginning of the study: n = 41 in the MiSight group (age: 11.01 ± 1.23 years, spherical equivalent: −2.16 ± 0.94 D, gender: male: 21, female: 20) and n = 33 in the single-vision group (age: 10.12 ± 1.38 years, spherical equivalent: −1.75 ± 0.94 D, gender: male: 12, female: 21). After 2 years of follow-up, myopia progressed slowly in the MiSight group compared to the control group (0.45 D vs 0.74 D, p < 0.001) and there was less axial elongation in the MiSight group compared to the single-vision group (0.28 mm vs 0.44 mm, p < 0.001). Therefore, use of MiSight CLs produced lower myopia progression (39.32%) and lower axial growth of the eye (36.04%) at 2 years compared to spectacle use. Conclusions: MiSight contact lens wear reduces axial elongation and myopia progression in comparison to distance single-vision spectacles in children. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01917110.
- PublicationPredicting factors for progression of the myopia in the MiSight assessment study Spain (MASS)(Spanish General Council of Optometrists, 2021-03-06) Prieto Garrido, Francisco Luis; Hernández Verdejo, José Luis; Villa Collar, César; Ruiz Pomeda, AliciaPurpose: To investigate which baseline factors are predictive for success in controlling myopia progression in a group of children wearing MiSight Contact Lens (CLs). Methods: Myopic patients (n = 41) fitted with MiSight CLs and followed up two years were included in this study. Bivariate analysis, a logistic regression analysis (LG) and a decision tree (DT) approach were used to screen for the factors influencing the success of the treatment. To assess the response, axial length (AL) changes were considered as main variable. Patients were classified based on a specific range of change of axial length at the end of each year of treatment as ‘‘responders’’ (R) (AL change <0.11 mm/per year) and ‘‘non-responders’’ (NR) (AL change ≥0.11 mm/per year). Results: Of a total of forty-one Caucasian patients treated with MiSight CLs, 21 and 16 were considered responders in the first and the second year of follow-up, respectively. LG analysis showed that the only factor associated with smaller axial length growth was more time spent outdoors (p = 0.0079) in the first year of treatment. The decision tree analysis showed that in the responding group spending more than 3 and 4 h outdoors per week was associated with the best response in the first year and in the second year of treatment respectively. Conclusions: The LR and the DT approach of this pilot study identifies time spent outdoors as a main factor in controlling axial eye growth in children treated with MiSight CLs.
- PublicationChanges in the Choroidal Thickness of Children Wearing MiSight to Control Myopia(MPDI, 2022-07-04) Prieto Garrido, Francisco Luis; Villa Collar, César; Hernández Verdejo, José Luis; Álvarez Peregrina, Cristina; Ruiz Pomeda, AliciaBackground: Due to the importance of choroidal thickness in the development of myopia, this study examined the effect of MiSight contact lenses (CLs) on the choroidal thickness of myopic children and the differences between responders and non-responders to the treatment with these CLs. Methods: A total of 41 myopic children were fitted with MiSight CLs and 33 with single-vision spectacles. They were followed up for two years. Subfoveal choroidal thickness and choroidal thickness 1 and 3 mm temporal and nasal to the fovea were measured by OCT at baseline and one and two years after the treatment. Differences in all the choroidal thickness parameters were assessed in each group over time. Patients from the MiSight group were classified based on a specific range of changes in axial length at the end of the second year of treatment as “responders” (AL change < 0.22 mm/per year) and “non-responders”, and the choroidal thickness of both groups was analyzed. Results: The subfoveal choroidal thickness of the MiSight and single-vision spectacle groups did not show any changes over time. Wearing MiSight CLs induced relative choroidal thickening in the responder group in the first year of treatment. Conclusion: Choroidal thickness might work as a predictor of the effectiveness of MiSight in myopia treatment.