Process capability measurement of frequent replacement spherical soft contact lenses

Contact Lens and Anterior Eye

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 127-135

  Young, G ^a   Lewis, Y ^b   Coleman, S ^a   Hunt, C ^a  

^a Visioncare Research Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^b Vistakon Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Lens measurement; Process capability; Reproducibility; Soft contact lenses

Indexed keywords

EID: 0005892982     PISSN: 13670484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1367-0484(99)80013-7     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. British College of Optometrists. Code of ethics and guidelines for professional conduct. Section 5.11: Disposable Lenses. March 1991.
2. Wodis, M., Hodur, H. and Jurkus, J. Disposable lens safety: the reproducibility factor. Int. Contact Lens Clin., 17, 96-102 (1990).
3. Plainis, S. Methods for verifying the power of soft contact lenses: a review. Optician 212 (5567), 42-52 (1996).
4. Montgomery, D.C. Introduction to statistical quality control 3rd Ed. 1997 John Wiley & Sons, New York. Chapt. 9 Process Capability Analysis pp 430-469.
5. Juran, J.M. and Gryna, F.M. Juran's quality control handbook 4th Ed. McGraw-Hill Inc. New York.
6. ISO 9338. Optics and optical instruments - Contact Lenses - Determination of the diameters (1996).
7. ISO 9339-2. Optics and optical Instruments - Contact Lenses - Determination of thickness Part 2: Hydrogel lenses (1998).
8. ISO/CD 9337-2.1. Optics and optical instruments - Contact Lenses - Determination of back vertex power Part 2: Moiré deflectometer (1996).
9. Hough, T., Livnat, A. and Keren, E. Inter-laboratory reproducibility of power measurement of toric hydrogel lenses using the focimeter and the Moiré deflectometer. J. Br. Contact Lens Assoc., 19, 117-127 (1996).
10. Keren, E., Zac, Y., Nabeth, F., Kreske, K. and Livnat, A. A quantitative criteria for determining the quality of ophthalmic lenses. SPIE Proceedings 1992; 1752.
11. Loran, D.F.C. The verification of hydrogel contact lenses. Chapt 13 In: Contact Lenses pp 426-463. Eds A.J. Phillips, L. Speedwell. 4th Edition. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford 1997.
12. Cox, I. and Holden, B.A. Soft contact lens-induced longitudinal spherical aberration and its effect on contrast sensitivity. Optom. Vis. Sci, 67, 679-683 (1990).
13. Lowther, G.E. and Tomlinson, A. Critical base curve and diameter interval in the fitting of spherical soft contact lenses. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt., 58, 355-60 (1981).
14. Fatt, I. A predictive model for dehydration of a hydrogel contact lens in the eye. J. Br. Contact Lens Assoc., 12, 15-31 (1989).
15. Grewal, I. and Young, G. How Relevant are the Labelled Diameters of Soft Lenses? Poster presented at the BCLA 23rd Annual Clinical Conference, Birmingham; May, 1999.
16. Roseman, M.J., Frost, A. and Lawley, M.E. Effects of base curve on the fit of thin, mid-water contact lenses. Int. Contact Lens Clin., 20, 95-101 (1993).
17. Young, G., Holden, B. and Cooke, G. The influence of soft contact lens design on clinical performance. Optom. Vis. Sci., 70, 394-403 (1993).
18. Long, W.D., Bauman, E., Dandridge, R. and Hagman, P. Measured versus labelled parameters of daily disposable contact lenses. Int. Contact Lens Clin., 24, 195-197. (1997).
19. Mertz, G.W. Corporate response to: Measured versus labelled parameters of daily disposable contact lenses. Int. Contact Lens Clinic 24, 195-196 (1997).