JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

An assessment of the optimal lens fit rate in keratoconus subjects using three-point-touch and apical touch fitting approaches with the rose K2 lens.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the number of ordered lenses required to achieve an optimal lens fit between three-point-touch and apical touch fittings in keratoconus subjects with nipple and oval cones using the first definite apical clearance lens (FDACL) as a starting point.

METHODS: First trial lens was selected following manufacturer's guidelines and the back optic zone radius (BOZR) was flattened or steepened in 0.10 mm steps until a FDACL was found. Subsequently, subjects were randomly allocated to three-point-touch (BOZR 0.10 mm flatter than FDACL) and apical touch fittings (BOZR 0.40 mm flatter than FDACL). Changes were made solely in total lens diameter, edge lift, and/or back vertex power until an optimal lens fit was achieved. Differences between fitting approaches were compared in terms of optimal lens fit rates defined as the percentage of subjects successfully fitted with the first lens ordered from the manufacturer.

RESULTS: Sixty-one subjects (109 eyes) were randomly allocated to three-point-touch and apical touch fitting approaches. An average of 2.3 trial lenses were necessary to achieve the FDACL. An optimal lens fit rate was achieved with the first lens in 84 of 109 eyes (77%). No statistically significant differences in optimal lens fit rates were found between three-point-touch and apical touch fitting approaches (83% and 71%, respectively; P = 0.12) and between nipple and oval cones (81% and 68%, respectively; P = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS: The use of the FDACL provides a systematic, reliable, and repeatable starting point for Rose K2 contact lens fitting in keratoconus. Eye care practitioners should anticipate higher optimal lens fit rates when using three-point-touch (83%) in comparison with apical touch contact lens fittings (71%).

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app