Cox Stephanie M, Berntsen David A, Bickle Katherine M, Mathew Jessica H, Powell Daniel R, Little B Kim, Lorenz Kathrine Osborn, Nichols Jason J
University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Optometry (S.M.C., J.J.N.), Birmingham, AL; The Ohio State University College of Optometry (K.M.B.), Columbus, OH; The Ocular Surface Institute (D.A.B., J.H.M., D.R.P.), University of Houston College of Optometry, Houston, TX; and Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc (B.K.L., K.O.L.), Jacksonville, FL.
Eye Contact Lens. 2018 Sep;44 Suppl 1:S296-S299. doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000418.
To assess whether patient-reported measures are improved with soft toric contact lenses (TCLs) compared with soft spherical contact lenses (SCLs) and whether clinical time needed to fit TCL is greater than SCL.
Habitual contact lens wearers with vertexed spherical refraction +4.00 to +0.25 D or -0.50 to -9.00 D and cylinder -0.75 to -1.75 DC were randomly assigned to be binocularly fitted into a TCL or SCL, and masked to treatment assignment. Time to successful fit was recorded. After 5 days, the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument (NEI-RQL-42) and modified Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS) were completed. After washout, subjects were fit into the alternative lens design (TCL or SCL). Outcomes were evaluated using linear mixed models for the time to fit and CISS score, generalized linear model for the successful fit, and Wilcoxon tests for the NEI-RQL-42.
Sixty subjects (71.7% women, mean age [±SD] = 27.5±5.0 years) completed the study. The mean time to fit the TCL was 10.2±4.3 and 9.0±6.5 min for the SCL (least square [LS] mean difference (TCL-SCL)=1.2, P=0.22). Toric contact lens scored better than SCL in global NEI-RQL-42 score (P=0.006) and the clarity of vision (P=0.006) and satisfaction with correction subscales (P=0.006). CISS showed a 15% reduction in symptoms (LS mean difference [TCL-SCL]=-2.20, P=0.02).
TCLs are a good option when trying to improve the vision of patients with low-to-moderate astigmatism given the subjective improvements in outcomes.
评估与软性球性角膜接触镜（SCL）相比，软性环曲面角膜接触镜（TCL）是否能改善患者报告的指标，以及验配TCL所需的临床时间是否比SCL更长。
将顶点球面屈光不正为+4.00至+0.25 D或-0.50至-9.00 D且柱镜为-0.75至-1.75 DC的习惯性角膜接触镜佩戴者随机分为两组，双眼分别验配TCL或SCL，并对治疗分配情况进行遮蔽。记录成功验配的时间。5天后，完成美国国立眼科研究所屈光不正生活质量量表（NEI-RQL-42）和改良型集合不足症状调查（CISS）。洗脱期后，为受试者验配另一种镜片设计（TCL或SCL）。使用线性混合模型评估验配时间和CISS评分的结果，使用广义线性模型评估成功验配的结果，使用Wilcoxon检验评估NEI-RQL-42的结果。
60名受试者（71.7%为女性，平均年龄[±标准差]=27.5±5.0岁）完成了研究。验配TCL的平均时间为10.2±4.3分钟，验配SCL的平均时间为9.0±6.5分钟（最小二乘[LS]平均差值（TCL-SCL）=1.2，P=0.22）。在NEI-RQL-42总分（P=0.006）、视力清晰度（P=0.006）和矫正满意度分量表（P=0.006）方面，环曲面角膜接触镜的得分高于SCL。CISS显示症状减轻了15%（LS平均差值[TCL-SCL]=-2.20，P=0.02）。
鉴于结果在主观上有所改善，对于试图改善中低度散光患者视力的情况，TCL是一个不错的选择。
