Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42873434›Full record

ReviewOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2026

Association Between Binocular Vision Disorders and Contact Lens Discomfort During Soft Contact Lens Wear: A Systematic Review.

Prithwis Manna, Ankit Raj, Ankita Kumari, Mark Willcox, Fiona Stapleton, James S Wolffsohn, Mukesh Kumar

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Prithwis Manna *Narayana Nethralaya, Bangalore, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8024-0538
Ankit Raj *LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Ankita Kumari *School of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mark WillcoxSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Fiona StapletonSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7203-5443
James S WolffsohnSchool of Optometry, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
Mukesh KumarSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. mukesh.kumar1@unsw.edu.au.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8266-633X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo synthesise and critically evaluate the evidence regarding accommodative and binocular vision dysfunction systematically in relation to visual discomfort during soft contact lens wear in non-presbyopic individuals, and to examine the association between soft contact lens optical designs and objective measures of accommodation and vergence. RECENT

findingsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar (inception to 13 May 2026) identified 403 records, of which 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 16 randomised trials, five non-randomised studies and two cross-sectional studies. Evidence demonstrated consistently that centre-distance multifocal, dual-focus and extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) soft contact lenses increased accommodative lag (1.0-1.7 D), accommodative variability (0.36-0.86 D) and near exophoria (1.8-2.4Δ), while reducing accommodative facility (4.5-9 cpm) compared with single-vision designs. Similar effects were observed across a broad range of myopic refractive errors (-1.00 to -9.25 D). In contrast, centre-near multifocal lenses were associated with lower accommodative lag and reduced near exophoria relative to single-vision and centre-distance multifocal designs. Toric soft contact lenses demonstrated improvements in near point of convergence (NPC) and subjective visual performance. Across studies evaluating symptomatic wearers, binocular vision dysfunction was reported in 23%-48% of participants and was associated with significantly greater symptom severity, as reflected by higher Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) and Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS) scores (p < 0.001). Collectively, these findings indicate that alterations in accommodative and vergence function associated with specific soft contact lens optical designs may be associated with visual discomfort during lens wear. Given the high prevalence of binocular vision dysfunction among symptomatic contact lens wearers, a brief binocular vision screening, including accommodative facility, near heterophoria, NPC and fusional vergence testing may assist clinicians in identifying underlying causes of visual discomfort and guiding targeted management strategies.

Indexed as

Accommodation and vergenceBinocular visionContact lensDual‑focus lensesExtended depth of focusMultifocal lensesVisual discomfort

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.