Myopia Control Evaluation via Prolateness Indicator Tracking
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current myopia control solutions lack individualized effectiveness evaluation, as they primarily rely on population-level comparisons, failing to accurately assess how each person responds to the treatment, leading to rare myopia regression or complete stop of progression, with most individuals' refraction worsening despite treatment.
Innovation Solution
A method involving the measurement and comparison of initial and subsequent prolateness indicators of the eye over time to evaluate the efficiency of myopia control solutions, allowing for adaptation of solution type or intensity based on individual response, using prolateness indicators determined through various angular zones, 2D or 3D measurements, and axial length or refractive changes.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If population-level comparison methods are used to evaluate myopia control solutions, then the evaluation process is simple and informative at the population level, but it fails to accurately assess individual response and cannot determine the extent to which an individual responds to the solution
Solution Approach 1:
The patent changes the evaluation parameter from population-level aggregate statistics to individual-level prolateness indicator measurements. By tracking the prolateness indicator (a geometric parameter describing retinal shape) for each individual eye over time, the system enables precise assessment of individual response while maintaining operational simplicity through automated measurement and comparison against reference values.
2Reliability
If aggressive myopia control solutions are used to slow down myopia progression, then myopia progression is effectively slowed, but side effects increase such as reduced accommodation and reduced visual acuity
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the prolateness indicator is measured at multiple time points (initial, intermediate, final) and compared against reference values. This feedback loop allows the system to assess whether an aggressive solution is necessary or if a milder solution suffices, enabling dynamic adjustment of treatment intensity based on individual response and minimizing unnecessary side effects.
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically adjusts the myopia control solution intensity based on individual prolateness evolution. Rather than applying a fixed aggressive treatment protocol, the system adapts the solution type and intensity according to the measured prolateness changes, allowing for flexible, personalized treatment that optimizes effectiveness while minimizing harmful side effects.
3Productivity
If myopia control solutions are applied to most individuals, then myopia progression is slowed for the majority, but myopia regression or complete stop of progression is very rare
Solution Approach 1:
The patent shifts focus from refractive error changes (which rarely regress) to prolateness indicator changes (which can regress). By measuring the geometric shape of the retina rather than just refractive error, the system can detect and report myopia regression or complete stop of progression that would otherwise be missed, improving the reliability of treatment success assessment.
Data Source
AI summary
A method of evaluating the efficiency of a myopia control solution for a person. The method includes providing an initial value of a prolateness indicator of at least one eye of the person, determining a second value of the prolateness indicator of the at least one eye of the person after having the person use the myopia control solution over a given period of time, and evaluating the efficiency of the myopia control solution by comparing the evolution between the initial and second values of the prolateness indicator of the at least one eye with a value of reference.