Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Med.

Sec. Ophthalmology

Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1635583

This article is part of the Research TopicNew Concepts, Advances, and Future Trends in Clinical Research on Eye DiseasesView all 59 articles

Impact of Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses on Shape Discrimination Threshold under Glare in Myopic Children

Provisionally accepted
Cuiting  HuangCuiting Huang1Xiuting  LiXiuting Li2Jufen  LiuJufen Liu3Jingjing  WuJingjing Wu1Yuqing  WangYuqing Wang1Lingli  LinLingli Lin1Jinfeng  ZhangJinfeng Zhang1Yanrong  ChenYanrong Chen1Zhaode  ZhangZhaode Zhang1*Li  LiLi Li4*
  • 1Ophthalmology Department, Ningde City Hospital, Affiliated to Ningde Normal University, Ningde, China
  • 2Ophthalmology Department, of Xiamen Children's Hospital, Xiamen, China
  • 3Ophthalmology Department, Shangyu People's Hospital of Shaoxing City, Shaoxing, China
  • 4Ophthalmology Department, Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Background: Multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCLs) are widely used to control myopia progression in children. However, their optical design may affect visual quality, especially under glare conditions, potentially influencing daily visual performance.To evaluate the impact of MFSCLs on shape discrimination threshold (SDT) under glare in myopic children by comparing changes in SDT under glare and non-glare conditions, with both MFSCLs and single vision spectacles.Methods: Thirty-seven myopic children (37 eyes) were enrolled and fitted with both MFSCLs and single vision spectacles for binocular myopia correction. Assessments included uncorrected and corrected visual acuity, corneal curvature, pupil diameter in a dark environment, and shape discrimination threshold (SDT) with glare (SDTon) and without glare (SDToff). Measurements from the right eye were analyzed. Shape discrimination thresholds (SDTs) were compared between lens types and lighting conditions, and correlations with ocular parameters were evaluated.Results: All participants achieved optimal MFSCL fit. No significant difference in SDTon or SDToff was observed between MFSCLs and spectacles (P > 0.05). However, SDTs were significantly elevated under glare compared to non-glare conditions (P < 0.001). In the MFSCL group, SDTon was significantly correlated with pupil diameter in the dark (r = 0.336, p = 0.042), as was the glareinduced SDT change (SDTdiff) (r = 0.354, p = 0.032). In the spectacle group, SDTdiff was significantly associated with spherical equivalent refractive error (r = 0.435, p = 0.007). No serious adverse events occurred, and mild corneal staining resolved with appropriate care.MFSCLs did not significantly worsen SDTs under glare in myopic children compared to spectacles, suggesting they do not exacerbate disability glare. These findings support the continued clinical use of MFSCLs for myopia management without compromising visual performance under glare conditions.

Keywords: Multifocal soft contact lenses, shape discrimination threshold, Glare, myopic children, Spectacles

Received: 26 May 2025; Accepted: 06 Aug 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Huang, Li, Liu, Wu, Wang, Lin, Zhang, Chen, Zhang and Li. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence:
Zhaode Zhang, Ophthalmology Department, Ningde City Hospital, Affiliated to Ningde Normal University, Ningde, China
Li Li, Ophthalmology Department, Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.