Mixed-methods study reports wearer satisfaction and socioeconomic barriers in young adults using DIMS lenses.
Purpose While defocus incorporated multiple segments (DIMS) spectacle lenses are clinically proven effective in slowing myopia progression, the long-term, real-world patient experience is poorly understood. This study aimed to provide both quantitative and qualitative analyses of the wearer experience in a long-term cohort of DIMS wearers. Methods This retrospective, convergent parallel mixed-methods study included 63 former child participants (now aged 17–23 years) who participated in the previous DIMS spectacle lenses clinical trial 8–10 years earlier. Data were collected 2 years after the final clinical trial concluded. A quantitative online questionnaire assessed wearer experience, while in-depth, semi-structured phone interviews explored the lived wearer journey. Predictors of satisfaction were identified using multiple linear regression and qualitative transcripts were analysed using a systematic thematic approach. Results Quantitative analysis revealed high satisfaction, with 88.9% of wearers satisfied or very satisfied and 90.4% believing in the efficacy of DIMS spectacle lenses. Regression analysis identified Maintenance and Durability as the strongest predictors of long-term satisfaction, alongside positive perceptions of appearance (adjusted R 2 = 0.50, p < 0.001). Qualitative analysis revealed a patient journey defined by parent-driven initiation, a manageable sensory adaptation period and strong perceived efficacy based on personal experience. However, only one-third of participants had continued DIMS use; a decision driven overwhelmingly by the high cost of the spectacles. Conclusion DIMS spectacle lenses provide a highly positive long-term wearer experience. However, the high cost of the spectacles creates a dominant socioeconomic barrier to treatment continuity, highlighting a critical gap between clinical success and access outside the trial setting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LEUNG et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: