B. Ralph Chou

Globally, hundreds of millions of outdoor workers are exposed to solar radiation (SR) for the majority of their working life. Such occupational exposure is known to induce various adverse health effects to the eyes, mainly related to its ultraviolet (UV) component. The present work is a call-to-action aimed at raising the awareness on the need of health surveillance for the prevention of the chronic ocular diseases in outdoor workers. Photo-chemical chronic damage can induce pterygium at the outer layer of the eye and cataract in the lens. Considering carcinogenic effects, rare squamous-cells tumors of the cornea and/or of the conjunctiva and the ocular melanomas are associated with UV radiation exposure. Solar UV-related eye diseases should be considered as "occupational diseases" when there is sufficient exposure in workers, but they are often not recognized, and/or frequently not reported to the national compensation authorities. Therefore, to prevent the burden of these work-related eye pathologies, an adequate risk assessment with identification of appropriate preventive measures, and a provision of periodic health surveillance to the exposed workers, in particular considering those at higher risk of exposure or with individual susceptibility, should be urgently implemented.

Scratches and other surface abrasions on protective eyewear can shorten their life cycle by scattering light from the image, which will compromise visual performance. Although scratch and abrasion resistance testing is well developed, there is little information available regarding visual acuity through lenses scratched in an actual work environment. We collected protective eyewear from mine and smelting operations that had been returned because vision through the lenses was unacceptable due to scratches and abrasions. Forward scattered light was measured on both cleaned and partially cleaned lenses using both haze and light diffusion measurements. Visual acuity through a selection of lenses was determined for both high and low contrast letters under photopic light levels. Lenses with scratches in the central region had haze values ranging from one to 30 per cent. The highest haze values were measured on lenses that were both scratched and covered with dirt, whereas haze values less than 10 per cent were measured on lenses that had the dirt removed and just had scratches in the central region. Light diffusion values were highly correlated with haze. Visual acuity for high and low contrast letters became worse as the percentage haze increased but the linear correlation was only moderate. The appearance of the scratches on the lens surfaces strongly suggests that they were a result of improper lens cleaning. The findings also suggest that haze values less than two per cent or a luminance reduction factor less than 3.0 cd/(m(2) lx) are unlikely to affect high and low contrast acuity.

Purpose: The aim was to assess the impact resistance of coated and uncoated mid‐index spectacle lens materials using the ballistic impact test. Methods: Nominally plano lenses of each material in three thicknesses were obtained. The lenses were flat edged to a 50 mm diameter. Each lens was impacted by a 6.35 mm steel ball. Impact velocities were selected using the Zippy Estimation by Sequential Testing protocol to determine the threshold fracture impact velocity. Results: Threshold fracture impact velocity generally increased with thickness; however, there was a wide variation in performance among the various lens materials at each thickness. In all but two instances, the differences in impact velocity at each thickness of lens material were significant. Comparison of the data for CR39 and Hoya Phoenix with the results of earlier studies showed that the lens mounting is a significant factor. The fracture velocities found in the present study were significantly lower than the fracture velocities found when the lens edge is restrained in the mounting. A scratch resistant coating reduced the impact resistance of CR39. The effect of the antireflection coating on the fracture velocity depended on the nature of the base scratch‐resistant coating. Conclusions: Mid‐index lens materials of the same thickness show widely varying levels of impact resistance under the ballistic test. Impact resistance increases non‐linearly with centre thickness. The lens mounting might affect the results of the ballistic impact test. The presence of ‘cushion coatings’ might enhance impact resistance.

Tolerances required for ophthalmic lenses are set down in national and international standards. It appears that the compliance of manufactured lenses has not been reported previously. Assembling a statistical quantity of lenses of a single prescription is usually an expensive process. It was, secondary to a lens impact study, possible to assemble a large number of plano lenses. In the assessment of the fracture velocity of lenses approximately 20 plano lenses of each material and thickness are required. Prior to using lenses for the impact study, they were checked for prescription. The results of the prescription measurements are reported here and the results of the impact study are reported in a separate paper. Using an automated focimeter, 679 plano lenses in stock thickness, typical occupational eye protector thickness and up to 3.5 mm thick were measured. There were 21 combinations of material/thickness/coating from seven suppliers. The power was evaluated against Australian Standard 2228.1-1992, as the lenses were supplied in Australia. The permitted tolerances are ±0.09 D sphere and ±0.06 D cylinder. When assessed for material/thickness/coating combination, failure rates varied from <0.0001 per cent to 77.5 per cent (with a further 17.3 per cent classified as borderline, because they were within the uncertainty of measurement of the required limit). Grouped by supplier, the failure rates ranged from <0.0001 per cent to 7.6 per cent (with a further 12.3 per cent borderline). To improve understanding of the result, it may be easier to quote the figures without considering uncertainties. When assessed by supplier, the failure rate varies from <0.0001 per cent to 12.6 per cent. Compliance of plano lenses should be among the easiest of tasks for a laboratory. While we know of no defined or required acceptance rates for prescription lenses, a failure rate for a laboratory of 12.6 per cent, which includes a failure rate of 88 per cent in 2.8 mm thick refractive index = 1.53 hard coated lenses (n = 20) cannot be considered satisfactory and is a strong indication of a failure to check lenses before they leave the laboratory.

To investigate how the impact resistance of Hoya Phoenix spectacle lenses is affected by centre thickness and the application of a multilayer antireflection (MAR) coating. Four groups of plano lenses were tested: dress thickness with scratch resistant (SR) coating on both surfaces, dress thickness with SR and MAR, industrial thickness with SR and industrial thickness with SR and MAR. Lenses were edged to a clear circular aperture of 50 mm with a 0.5 mm hidden bevel and mounted in a specially-designed lens support. A pneumatic gun was used to propel a 6.35 mm steel ball at the centre of each lens. Impact speed was varied using the ZEST protocol to determine the threshold breakage speed. The threshold breakage speeds of the dress and industrial thickness SR lenses were 55.1 and 63.2 m/s, respectively and the corresponding threshold breakage speeds for SR-MAR lenses were 50.1 and 54.7 m/s. All comparisons were statistically significant using Student's t-test with a rejection level of p < 0.005. Unlike polycarbonate lenses, dress thickness Phoenix lenses do not display 'oilcanning' deformation on high energy impact and therefore are less likely to be dislodged from their mountings. We found that the mean impact resistance of the Phoenix lenses was greater than the level required of eye protector lenses by the standards AS/NZS 1337:1992, ANSI Z87.1-2003 and CSA Z94.3-02. Similar to CR39 and polycarbonate, the application of MAR to Phoenix lenses reduces their impact resistance, however, they provide an acceptable level of impact protection in industrial settings, where there is little danger of exposure to pointed or sharp-edged high-speed missiles.

Purpose.: Previous work has shown that the impact resistance to blunt missiles is affected by coatings applied to either CR‐39 or polycarbonate lenses. We investigated the effects of multiple antireflection (minimum angle of resolution [MAR]) coatings on the resistance of polycarbonate lenses to puncture on impact by sharp, high‐speed missiles. Methods.: Four groups of surfaced plano polycarbonate lenses were investigated. Two groups had a scratch‐resistant (SR) coating applied to both surfaces. One of these groups had a 2‐mm center thickness and the other had a 3‐mm center thickness. The other two groups of 2‐mm and 3‐mm thick lenses had a MAR coating applied over the SR coating. The lenses were impacted by a missile consisting of an industrial sewing machine needle mounted in a cylindrical aluminum carrier. Results.: The sharp missiles were able to pierce the lenses at speeds between 29.6 m/s and 46.2 m/s. Impact resistance was lowest for the thinner lenses and lenses with a MAR coating. The effect of the MAR and lens thickness was subadditive. Conclusions.: We have confirmed previous observations that polycarbonate lenses are more susceptible to penetration by sharp, high‐speed missiles than blunt missiles. We have also found that reducing lens center thickness and applying a MAR coating further reduces the penetration resistance. Therefore, the use of 2‐mm center thickness and MAR‐coated polycarbonate lenses should be discouraged for industrial eye protectors where sharp missile hazards are possible.

To study the effect of coatings on the resistance of CR-39 industrial plano lenses to ballistic impacts and abrasion from fine particles. Twelve groups of CR-39 lenses with various scratch-resistant (SR) or combinations of scratch-resistant and antireflective (SR-AR) coatings were mounted in metal industrial spectacle frames. The ZEST protocol was used to determine the mean impact speed for breakage of each lens group using the Canadian Standards Association ballistic test protocol. One pair of lenses from each group was tested for abrasion resistance using the falling sand method. Abrasion resistance was ranked by the degree of haze observed by three independent observers. Uncoated lenses had the best impact resistance and worst abrasion resistance. SR-coated lenses showed mild to moderate reductions in impact resistance, with no correlation between impact and abrasion resistance. SR-AR-coated lenses had very good abrasion resistance, but severely reduced impact resistance. Most SR-coated CR-39 lenses have a high probability of meeting the high-velocity impact resistance requirement of industrial lenses, whereas CR-39 lenses with SR-AR coats are too fragile to be used in industrial spectacles. As a group, the SR-AR coating tended to be more resistant to abrasion by fine particles and less resistant to ballistic impacts, but the abrasion resistance of the SR-coated lenses was more variable, and, thus, overall there was no significant correlation between impact resistance and abrasion resistance.