A comparison of spectacle and contact lens wearing times in the ACHIEVE study

Abstract

Purpose:The aim was to compare vision correction wearing time between myopic children and teenagers in a clinical trial of contact lenses and spectacles. Methods: Parents of subjects in the Adolescent and Child Health Initiative for Vision Empowerment (ACHIEVE) study provided wearing times for spectacle and contact lens wear. Hours wearing primary correction and total correction were compared between the two treatment groups. Other factors hypothesised to be associated with wearing time were analysed. Results: The average wearing time of the primary correction differed significantly with the wearing time for the spectacles group being 91.5 hours per week compared to 80.3 hours per week for the contact lens wearers (p < 0.0001). Total correction time was slightly higher for the contact lens wearers, 97.5 hours per week, after accounting for time wearing spectacles. Higher refractive error was strongly related to longer wearing times (p < 0.0002). Age and treatment group were associated with wearing time (p = 0.005). Young contact lens wearers wore their lenses less than young spectacle wearers and older contact lens wearers. Low scores on an appearance quality-of-life scale were associated with longer wearing time in spectacle wearers compared to the low-and high-scoring contact lens wearers. Gender, spectacle satisfaction and activities were not related to wearing time. Conclusions: While contact lens wearers, on average, wear their contact lenses less than spectacle wearers, they spend roughly the same amount of time wearing a refractive correction. Higher refractive error resulted in longer wearing times for both spectacle and contact lens wearers. Younger contact lens wearers wore their contact lenses for shorter periods than the spectacle wearers, but still wore them, on average, 74.4 hours per week (about 10 hours per day), suggesting that contact lenses are a viable alternative mode of correction for children.

Interventions to slow progression of myopia in children

“…Our reasons for exclusion are based on four categories: (1) the study was not randomized, 43 studies; (2) the study interventions were not intended to control myopia progression, 10 studies; (3) the study interventions were not in the scope of this review, five studies; and (4) the study population was not eligible for this review, three studies. We excluded two RCTs from this review comparing SVSCLs with spectacles in myopic children and adolescents (ACHIEVE study; Horner 1999). We excluded these studies because SVSCLs and spectacles are not meant to control the progression of myopia.…”

“…We excluded these studies because SVSCLs and spectacles are not meant to control the progression of myopia. The purpose of the ACHIEVE study was to compare the effects of contact lens wear with spectacle wear on the children’s self-perception.…”

Daily Disposable Contact Lenses versus Spectacles in Teenagers

“…4Y6 These effects ultimately lead to the wearer having greater satisfaction with his or her vision correction method. 1 Nevertheless, some eye care practitioners may be reluctant to prescribe contact lenses for teenagers. 1 Nevertheless, some eye care practitioners may be reluctant to prescribe contact lenses for teenagers.…”

Strategies to Regulate Myopia Progression With Contact Lenses

“…Jones-Jordan et al in the context of the Adolescent and Child Health Initiative to Encourage Vision Empowerment (ACHIEVE) study reported that children are able to safely wear CLs. 99 Studies of the safety of daily disposable CLs are useful to estimate the risks. 66,100,101 Unfortunately, none of the studies reported, including soft CLs designed specifically for myopia regulation, had adequate statistical power for a safety analysis or provided information regarding the complications or adverse events.…”