ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
The Effect of Orthokeratology Lens Decentration on Ocular and Biomechanical Measurements.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the effects of orthokeratology (ortho-K) lens decentration on ocular and biomechanical parameters and analyze the correlation of these parameters with decentration distance. Methods: Thirty eyes of 30 myopic adult subjects, mean age 28.2 years who had worn ortho-K lens for two hours were recruited for this prospective study. Under both the central and eccentric lens fitting conditions, the subjects underwent two rounds of assessments with a week-long interval. The ocular parameters were measured by an IOL Master, whereas the biomechanical parameters were measured by a Corves ST. Differences between measurements were evaluated by one-way ANOVA and a post hoc test. Repeatability was analyzed based on within-subject standard deviation (Sw), repeatability coefficient (RC), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and correlation of variation (CoV). Pearson correlation analysis was employed for correlation analysis. Results: The ocular parameters showed no significant differences, whereas among the biomechanical parameters, the biomechanical corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) (95% CI 15.8-16.7 mmHg, 14.7-15.6 mmHg, 14.5-15.5 mmHg for baseline, central and eccentric group) and stiffness parameter at first applanation (SPA1) (95% CI 111.7-122.4, 102.3-113.0, 103.9-115.1 for baseline, central and eccentric group) showed significant changes after ortho-K. In all groups, the ocular parameters showed good repeatability with ICC values greater than 0.95 and CoV values lower than 1.3%. By contrast, the biomechanical parameters showed poor repeatability with low ICC values (ie, below 0.7) for the length of flattened cornea at the first and second applanations (A1L and A2L, respectively) and for velocity of corneal apex at the second applanation (A2V) in the baseline group; for A1L, A2L, and bIOP in the central group; and for A1L and A2V in the eccentric group. The correlation analysis showed the positive relationship in A2L between central and eccentric groups. Conclusion: Ortho-K lens decentration did not influence the ocular parameters. However, the biomechanical parameters, the bIOP and SPA1 related to corneal thickness changed after ortho-K.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.