Retrospective review of the effectiveness of orthokeratology versus soft peripheral defocus contact lenses for myopia management in an academic setting.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of peripheral defocus contact lenses (PDCLs) and orthokeratology (OK) in a real-world clinical population, and compare these results with previous randomised controlled clinical trials.

METHODS

Records from a university practice were reviewed to identify children who were treated with OK or PDCLs. The analysed sample contained 273 visits from 77 patients. Annualised rates of axial length (AL) progression were calculated and used as the response variable in both linear mixed-effects (LME) and nonlinear regression models.

RESULTS

On average, children were 10.7 years of age at baseline (p = 0.14 between treatments), and most patients were female. More Asian children wore OK lenses compared with PDCLs (p < 0.01). At baseline, children had ~3.00 D of myopia and 0.75 D of astigmatism in both treatment groups (p > 0.20 between treatments). LME regression models using only baseline covariates showed no evidence that the annualised change in AL differed between treatments, with or without the inclusion of age, race, sex, baseline AL or spherical equivalent refractive error. Across all possible subsets of models, age at baseline was the best predictor of annualised AL change. There was no statistical difference between parameters of an exponential decay model fitted within treatment using follow-up age as a time-varying predictor, indicating that the rate of annualised change in AL was similar for OK and PDCL.

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospective analysis of real-world clinical data found no difference in annualised AL growth between PDCL and OK. Importantly, the AL progression from this clinical setting is consistent with that reported in randomised clinical trials. Therefore, continued research of real-world performance is warranted to understand the safety and efficacy of modern myopia control treatments in the broader population.