Zeiss MyoVision reduces myopia by 30%

**Yeap** · 05-12-2010, 09:58 PM

@ uncut: the time line is Oct 2007-jan 2009..sorry my mistake.

**Yeap** · 05-12-2010, 10:08 PM

If not compare either ortho k or Myovision can achieve a better result. i will think that now we have another option for our patient that concern about their myope progression. as Darryl mentioned it has been study through 6-12 years old kids but i really curious how the outcome if i fit it to some 15 -18 years old teens, as in Asia the myope progression is at the level that worries the practitioner.

**Darryl Meister** · 05-12-2010, 10:22 PM

Children through 16 years of age were included in the study but they experienced less of a benefit than the younger children. As did children with no myopic parents.

**rbaker** · 05-12-2010, 10:41 PM

Just wondering if anyone can cite any peer reviewed articles on this interesting topic?

**Darryl Meister** · 05-12-2010, 10:43 PM

I have a few that I can dig up tomorrow.

**uncut** · 05-13-2010, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by uncut

I'm a bit confused by the timeline you use on this study Oct 2009 to Jan 2009 ????????

A grand conclusion for such a short timeline in a developing child's life, don't you think?

**snotbagel** · 05-15-2010, 10:15 AM

Depending on the OD's perspective, parents these days can be very receptive to passive fixes to their kids problems. WE know that moderate myopia is much more prevalent than in pre-industrial populations. The average amount is just about our regular reading distance..does anyone see smoke yet?
Tearing the kids away from their Ipods, etc, is too much trouble, however..lets just fix em up after with expensive eyewear!..Yeah..big bucks for me!

I know, I'm being sarcastic,..but also a bit truthful..

**fjpod** · 05-18-2010, 03:32 AM

I found this related to the topic
http://vimeo.com/10917445

If it works, I think this will be almost as big as progressive lenses are to the industry.

**rdcoach5** · 05-21-2010, 07:35 AM

Darryl, do you have links to any studies on this?

**icare** · 05-21-2010, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by rbaker

Just wondering if anyone can cite any peer reviewed articles on this interesting topic?

Ditto

**Darryl Meister** · 05-21-2010, 08:59 AM

I'll see if I can post something later this weekend.

**manoj_verma** · 05-23-2010, 10:49 PM

INTERESTING !
requisitng to mr DARRYL......would it be possible to get this lens in MIDDLE EAST ?

**Chris Ryser** · 05-24-2010, 03:32 AM

Vision Therapy
Like Bates, "Vision therapists" claim to strengthen eyesight through a series of exercises. In contrast to Bates' use of relaxation, vision therapists promote active exercises. They emphasize exercising focusing, eye pointing and eye movement skills. Exercises may include eye-hand coordination drills, watching a series of blinking lights, staring at colored lights (Syntonics), bouncing on a trampoline and even sleeping in a certain position. Often they prescribe bifocal and prism glasses to prevent or cure nearsightedness. In addition to promising to eliminate glasses, they claim that these methods can also improve school and athletic performance, increase I.Q., help overcome learning problems and attention disorders and even prevent juvenile delinquency. However, no scientific evidence supports such claims [2-4].
In 2009, the United Kingdom's College of Optometrists evaluated ten types of controversial eye-related programs claimed to improve visual, mental, neurological, and behavioral problems: (a) vision therapy for accommodation/convergence disorders; (b) vision therapy for dyslexia and other forms of academic underachievement; (c) prisms for near binocular disorders and for producing postural change; (d) near point stress and low-plus prescriptions; (e) use of low-plus lenses for close work to slow the progression of myopia; (f) exercises to reduce myopia; (g) behavioral approaches to treating strabismus and amblyopia; (h) training central and peripheral awareness and syntonics; (i) sports vision therapy; and (j) neurorehabilitation after trauma/stroke. The reviewers concluded:

There is a continued paucity of controlled trials in the literature to support behavioural optometry approaches. Although there are areas where the available evidence is consistent with claims made by behavioural optometrists (most notably in relation to the treatment of convergence insufficiency, the use of yoked prisms in neurological patients, and in vision rehabilitation after brain disease/injury), a large majority of behavioural management approaches are not evidence-based, and thus cannot be advocated [5].

There is a proven segment of vision therapy known as orthoptics which can help with symptoms of visual strain or fatigue in individuals with mild eye coordination or focus problems (including conversion insufficienty), double vision, or even strabismus ("crossed" or turned eyes) and amblyopia ("lazy eye") [6-9]. Many optometrists, ophthalmologists, and Certified Orthoptists offer orthoptic diagnostic and treatment services.

**rdcoach5** · 05-26-2010, 08:51 AM

We are still waiting on a peer reviewed study on Myovision. Maybe there isn't one. Just you Tube?

**icare** · 05-26-2010, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by Chris Ryser

Vision Therapy
Like Bates, "Vision therapists" claim to strengthen eyesight through a series of exercises. In contrast to Bates' use of relaxation, vision therapists promote active exercises. They emphasize exercising focusing, eye pointing and eye movement skills. Exercises may include eye-hand coordination drills, watching a series of blinking lights, staring at colored lights (Syntonics), bouncing on a trampoline and even sleeping in a certain position. Often they prescribe bifocal and prism glasses to prevent or cure nearsightedness. In addition to promising to eliminate glasses, they claim that these methods can also improve school and athletic performance, increase I.Q., help overcome learning problems and attention disorders and even prevent juvenile delinquency. However, no scientific evidence supports such claims [2-4].
In 2009, the United Kingdom's College of Optometrists evaluated ten types of controversial eye-related programs claimed to improve visual, mental, neurological, and behavioral problems: (a) vision therapy for accommodation/convergence disorders; (b) vision therapy for dyslexia and other forms of academic underachievement; (c) prisms for near binocular disorders and for producing postural change; (d) near point stress and low-plus prescriptions; (e) use of low-plus lenses for close work to slow the progression of myopia; (f) exercises to reduce myopia; (g) behavioral approaches to treating strabismus and amblyopia; (h) training central and peripheral awareness and syntonics; (i) sports vision therapy; and (j) neurorehabilitation after trauma/stroke. The reviewers concluded:

There is a continued paucity of controlled trials in the literature to support behavioural optometry approaches. Although there are areas where the available evidence is consistent with claims made by behavioural optometrists (most notably in relation to the treatment of convergence insufficiency, the use of yoked prisms in neurological patients, and in vision rehabilitation after brain disease/injury), a large majority of behavioural management approaches are not evidence-based, and thus cannot be advocated [5].

There is a proven segment of vision therapy known as orthoptics which can help with symptoms of visual strain or fatigue in individuals with mild eye coordination or focus problems (including conversion insufficienty), double vision, or even strabismus ("crossed" or turned eyes) and amblyopia ("lazy eye") [6-9]. Many optometrists, ophthalmologists, and Certified Orthoptists offer orthoptic diagnostic and treatment services.

Not sure if this thread has just been hijacked or not......:hammer:

To clarify, it might be best to include that vision therapy and orthoptics are terms that are often used interchangeably. There is a wide body of literature supporting the benefits of vision therapy, but many readers conclude that those techniques are similar if not identical to those used in orthoptic training.

OMD's like the term orthoptics. ODs like the term vision therapy. Tomayto/Tomahto. I hope the readers don't get the sense that vision therapy is voodoo eye care. That would be unfair to those that have proven gains from visual training.

**uncut** · 05-27-2010, 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by rdcoach5

We are still waiting on a peer reviewed study on Myovision. Maybe there isn't one. Just you Tube?

It it highly likely that some "palm grease" is required in order to obtain such a study?

**Win C** · 05-31-2010, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by Darryl Meister

I'll see if I can post something later this weekend.

Brien Holden and Co has done a study on 200+ children in China using Myovision. How come they did not publish their findings in scientific publications?

**rdcoach5** · 05-31-2010, 11:55 AM

Maybe it was not a good scientific study that would hold up to review?

**allanon** · 06-01-2010, 05:14 PM

Speaking of Zeiss... I understand they're going to cause a bit of a stir tomorrow

**rdcoach5** · 06-02-2010, 07:23 AM

OK what's the news with Zeiss?

**finefocus** · 06-02-2010, 11:22 AM

OK, this thread now has been hijacked.
Back to the original topic: Isn't it true that the progression of myopia is due to changes in corneal curvature and/or globe size, both related to growth? Is the conformation of the eye finalized before puberty? Doesn't the eye continue to change until adulthood? Am I wrong, or do kids' eyes seem to change most dramatically during growth spurts, like when they grow 15 inches over a summer? How can eyeglasses deal with that? I'm confused; possibly simply incorrect, but confused.

**Darryl Meister** · 06-06-2010, 06:43 PM

Just wondering if anyone can cite any peer reviewed articles on this interesting topic?

The abstract of the Vision CRC study for MyoVision lenses has been published online on ARVO's website at Progression of Myopia With Spectacle Lenses Designed to Reduce Relative Peripheral Hyperopia: 12 Months Results. A paper has also been submitted to and accepted by Optometry and Vision Science, although it has not been published yet, so keep an eye out for it.

The study included 210 Chinese children aged 6 to 16 years, and ran from 2007 to 2008.

Another interesting article on the subject of the shape of the myopic eye and the potential mechanisms behind the development of myopia is Homeostasis of Eye Growth and the Question of Myopia.

**uncut** · 06-06-2010, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by Darryl Meister

The abstract of the Vision CRC study for MyoVision lenses has been published online on ARVO's website at Progression of Myopia With Spectacle Lenses Designed to Reduce Relative Peripheral Hyperopia: 12 Months Results. A paper has also been submitted to and accepted by Optometry and Vision Science, although it has not been published yet, so keep an eye out for it.

The study included 210 Chinese children aged 6 to 16 years, and ran from 2007 to 2008.

Another interesting article on the subject of the shape of the myopic eye and the potential mechanisms behind the development of myopia is Homeostasis of Eye Growth and the Question of Myopia.

O.K. So now we have at least a link to "an abstract". Thank you Darryl!.........................now......................... how about a little teensyweensy hint about this glorious lens design????? Since it is from Zeiss, I assume you have some information about what makes this lens so special.

**uncut** · 06-06-2010, 07:50 PM

Is anybody else finding this a painful process of information extraction? Something like a root canal? :bbg

**Darryl Meister** · 06-06-2010, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by uncut

how about a little teensyweensy hint about this glorious lens design?????

I actually explained the lens design back in Post #14. It is essentially a highly aspheric lens single vision lens that corrects the relative hyperopia in the peripheral retinal of the myopic eye.

The lens design is a bit more complex than that, with some degree of asymmetry, but this is probably the easiest way to think of it.

Originally Posted by uncut

Is anybody else finding this a painful process of information extraction? Something like a root canal?

Keep in mind that that the product was only recently launched in Asia-Pacific. The product hasn't actually launched in the US, and will not be launching here anytime soon, so I, personally, wouldn't normally have as much information regarding the product readily available.

Also, much of the information regarding the clinical study that you are requesting has only recently been submitted for publication. Until it has been published, there isn't a lot to share with you regarding the actual study, beyond the abstracts.