The Comparison of Overnight Lens Modalities (COLM) Study

Eye and Contact Lens

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 70-75

  Ritchey, Eric R ^a,b   Barr, Joseph T ^b   Mitchell, G Lynn ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ST LOUIS   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Corneal refractive therapy; Extended wear; Overnight orthokeratology; Refractive quality of life

Indexed keywords

SILICONE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTACT LENS; CONTRAST; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE REFRACTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYDROGEL; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; MYOPIA; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RANK SUM TEST; REFRACTION ERROR; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VISUAL ACUITY; CORNEA; EXTENDED WEAR CONTACT LENS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

ADULT; CONTACT LENSES, EXTENDED-WEAR; CORNEA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MYOPIA; PILOT PROJECTS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REFRACTION, OCULAR; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 18944374548     PISSN: 15422321     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.ICL.0000146323.18919.13     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Mountford J. An analysis of the changes in corneal shape and refractive error induced by accelerated orthokeratology. ICLC 1997;24:128-143.
2. Dave T, Ruston D. Current trends in modern orthokeratology. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1998;18(2):224-233.
3. Nichols JJ, Marsich MM, Nguyen M, et al. Overnight orthokeratology. Optom Vis Sci 2000;77:252-259.
4. Caroline P. Contemporary orthokeratology. Contact Lens Anterior Eye 2001;24:41-46.
5. Rah MJ, Jackson JM, Jones LA, et al. Overnight orthokeratology: Preliminary results of the Lenses and Overnight Orthokeratology (LOOK) Study. Optom Vis Sci 2002;79:598-605.
6. Food and Drug Administration. Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data: CIBA Vision Focus NIGHT & DAY. Rockville, MD, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, 2001.
7. Hays RD, Mangione CM, Ellwein L, et al. Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument. Ophthalmology 2003;110:2292-2301.
8. Hays RD, Spritzer KL. National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument (NEI-RQL-42), Version 1.0: A manual for use and scoring. Los Angeles, 2002.
9. Iruzubieta JM, Ripoll JRN, Chiva J, et al. Practical experience with a high Dk lotrafilcon A fluorosilicone hydrogel extended wear contact lens in Spain. CLAO J 2001;27:41-46.
10. Nilsson SE. Seven-day extended wear and 30-day continuous wear of high oxygen transmissibility soft silicone hydrogel contact lenses: A randomized 1-year study of 504 patients. CLAO J 2001;27:125-136.
11. Fast M, Parks J, Premer C, et al. Patient preference for 30-day continuous wear and overnight corneal reshaping. Optom Vis Sci 2003;80(12s):189.
12. Binder PS, May CH, Grant SC. An evaluation of orthokeratology. Ophthalmology 1980;87:729-744.
13. Polse KA, Brand RJ, Schwalbe JS, et al. The Berkeley Orthokeratology Study, part II: Efficacy and duration. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1983;60:187-198.
14. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, Saracino M, et al. Reliability and validity of refractive error-specific quality-of-life instruments. Arch Ophthalmol 2003;121:1289-1296.
15. Hulley S, Cummings S, Browner W, et al. Designing Clinical Research, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001.