Ocular Surface Comfort During the Day Assessed by Instant Reporting in Different Types of Contact and Non–Contact Lens Wearers

Performance of a Toric, Monthly, Soft Contact Lens in Digital Device Users

Purpose

To determine the performance of TOTAL30 for Astigmatism (T30fA; Alcon; Fort Worth, TX, USA) contact lenses (CLs) in existing CL wearers who are also frequent digital device users.

Methods

This 1-month, 3-visit study recruited adult, 18- to 40-year-old subjects who were required to use daily digital devices for at least 8 hours per day. All subjects were refit into T30fA CLs. A text message visual analog scale (VAS) (±50 scale; positive being comfortable) evaluate at-home eye comfort across the day at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month. Subjects were evaluated at 1 month with the Computer Vision Syndrome Questionnaire (CVS-Q), Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) Quality of Life questionnaire, and a custom questionnaire.

Results

A total 48 subjects were analyzed (mean age = 28.8 ± 6.3 years; 75% female). At 1 month, IDEEL daily activities, feelings, and work domains scores were 96.7 ± 6.6, 96.4 ± 6.2, and 94.8 ± 8.6, respectively. CVS-Q scores were 3.48 ± 3.73. Most of the subjects indicated that they were satisfied with the overall performance of the study CLs (81.3%) and with their level of eye strain with the study CLs (87.3%). When evaluating CL comfort with the VAS, comfort did not differ across the month at each time point (all p-value ≥ 0.16), yet CL comfort did decrease minimally across the wear day (all p-value < 0.001).

Conclusion

These data suggest that the monthly study CLs can provide an excellent wearing experience for those with frequent digital device use.

Determination of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for Ocular Subjective Responses

Purpose

To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for contact lens (CL)-related subjective responses and explore whether MCID values differ between subjective responses and study designs.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of data from seven one-week bilateral crossover studies and 14 one-day contralateral CL studies. For comfort, dryness, vision, or ease of insertion, participants rated on a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS) and indicated lens preference on a five-point Likert scale featuring strong, slight, and no preferences. For each criterion, four MCID estimates were calculated and averaged: mean VAS score difference for "slight preference," lower limit of 95% confidence interval VAS score difference for "slight preference," difference in mean VAS score difference between "slight" and "no preference" and 0.5 standard deviation of VAS scores.

Results

The four calculation methods generated a small range of MCID values. For bilateral studies, the averaged MCID was 7.2 (range 5.4-8.8) for comfort, 8.1 (5.2-10.6) for dryness, 7.1 (5.5-9.3) for vision and 7.6 (6.0-10.5) for ease of insertion. For contralateral studies, the averaged MCID was 6.9 (6.1-7.6) for comfort at insertion and 7.5 (6.8-8.2) for end-of-day comfort.

Conclusions

This work demonstrated very similar MCID values across subjective responses and study designs, in a population of habitual soft CL wearers. In all cases, MCID values were on average seven units on a 0 to 100 VAS.

Translational Relevance

This work provides MCID values which are important for interpreting ocular subjective responses and planning clinical studies.

The association between participant-reported ratings of comfort, dryness and vision quality in soft contact lens wearers

INTRODUCTION

Previous literature has indicated an association between participant-reported perceptions (e.g., ratings) of comfort, dryness and vision quality during soft contact lens wear. However, these reports do not account for participant- and lens-specific factors which may impact the interpretation of these results. The purpose of this project was to quantify the association between these participant-reported ratings while accounting for both participant- and lens-specific factors.

METHODS

Participant-reported ratings (scale 0-100) of comfort, dryness and quality of vision for 675 soft contact lens wearers (1207 eyes) were aggregated across 31 studies completed at Indiana University. Linear mixed-effects regression modelling was performed on each outcome rating individually. Covariate-adjusted models incorporated both participant- (e.g., age, sex) and lens-related (e.g., lens material, edge and optics) factors. The models were statistically adjusted for the duration of lens wear in hours and cumulative days of exposure.

RESULTS

Consistent with estimates from covariate-adjusted regression models, pairwise Spearman correlations [95% CI] between dryness and comfort (rs = 0.71, [0.69, 0.74]), vision quality and comfort (rs = 0.53, [0.49, 0.57]) and vision quality and dryness (rs = 0.49, [0.42, 0.54]) were all positive and had p < 0.001. Average participant-reported ratings of comfort, dryness and vision quality decreased by (bs [95% CI]) = -0.81 [-1.15, -0.46] -0.34 [-0.67, 0.0005] and -0.90 [-1.19, -0.60] rating units, respectively, for each hour of lens wear.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant positive associations were found between participant-reported measures of comfort, dryness and vision quality during soft contact lens wear. The associations between these ratings and the participant- and lens-related factors that drive them should be considered by clinicians and manufacturers when fitting and designing soft contact lenses.

Ultra-low friction in soft contact lenses: Analysis of dynamic free responses measured by the dynamic oscillating tribometer

Friction coefficient is considered as a measurement for clinical comfort of soft contact lenses. One of the main challenges in the tribology field is to evaluate the friction in soft materials such as soft contact lenses. In this work, we aim to evaluate the friction at the eyelid-lens contact using a new technique. This technique is based on a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) mass-spring system having a sliding contact. The experimental technique measures the free responses of the mechanical system. The friction is then evaluated from the damped free responses with a high accuracy. A variety of soft contact lenses are tested with some lubricants under many physiological conditions. The results are discussed and compared with those in the literature.

Real-Time Ocular Comfort Reporting in Monthly Replacement Contact Lens Wearers

Purpose

To map contact lens (CL) comfort over the full wear day and across 1 month's wear in established, asymptomatic to minimally symptomatic, reusable, soft CL wearers.

Methods

Adult, 18- to 45-year-old, participants were recruited and required to have 20/20 best-corrected visual acuity or better and must have been asymptomatic to minimally symptomatic CL wearers. Participants were required to be able to wear TOTAL30® sphere CLs and have minimal astigmatism. Participants were fit in the study CLs and asked to wear these CLs daily for the next month for 16 hours per day each day. Participants were asked to complete a visual analog scale (VAS) survey via text message at time of CL application and after 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 hours of wear and at CL removal on days 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 and at 2 weeks and 1 month. The utilized VAS had a ±50 scale with positive scores being comfortable, negative scores being uncomfortable, and scores of 0 being neutral comfort.

Results

Forty-eight participants were recruited who had a mean ± SD age of 26.2 ± 5.2 years (71% female). Mean initial VAS CL comfort scores at initial CL dispense were 45.56 ± 9.20 units. Mean CL wear times for any of the days evaluated were at least 14.80 ± 2.41 hours per day and did not differ across the study (p = 0.77). Mean comfort VAS scores significantly decreased over the wear day (all days p ≤ 0.02), yet there were no significant differences in VAS comfort scores across the same time of day for the duration of the study (all times p ≥ 0.06).

Conclusion

This study determined that while CL wearers were slightly less comfortable at the end of the day compared to application, this comfort change was minimal given that the average participants had overwhelmingly good comfort at all time-points evaluated. Comfort scores were likewise consistent across 1 month of wear.

Exploring the factors which impact overall satisfaction with single vision contact lenses

PURPOSE

To explore the impact of subjective factors (lens handling, comfort and vision) on overall single vision contact lens satisfaction.

METHODS

Correlation analysis of a prospective, randomised, double-masked, bilateral crossover study involving 55 adapted lens wearers fitted with somofilcon A (SiHy) (clariti® 1 day, CooperVision) and etafilcon A (Hy) (1 DAY ACUVUE® MOIST, Johnson & Johnson Vision) was conducted. Subjective ratings of lens handling, comfort and vision collected after 1 week of lens wear for each lens type were correlated with overall satisfaction. Data were analysed by combining data for both lens types and also for each lens separately.

RESULTS

For the combined analysis, significant correlations (p < 0.01) were found between subjective ratings of overall satisfaction and ratings of handing for application (r = 0.64), handling for removal (r = 0.50), comfort upon application (r = 0.59), comfort at end of day (r = 0.61), overall satisfaction with comfort (r = 0.88) and overall satisfaction with vision (r = 0.64). Correlation analysis of the per lens data showed that lens specific correlations of overall satisfaction with handling for lens application varied greatly with lens material (SiHy: r = 0.26, p = 0.05 vs Hy: r = 0.72, p < 0.01). Correlation strength of comfort upon application/at end of day with overall satisfaction also varied with lens material (Application: SiHy: r = 0.40 vs Hy: r = 0.61; End of day: SiHy: r = 0.76 vs Hy: r = 0.58; all p ≤ 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Overall satisfaction was significantly correlated with the specific subjective evaluations of handling, vision and comfort. Correlations of overall satisfaction and ease of handling for each lens type suggest that, for habitual contact lens wearers, dissatisfaction with handling at the time of lens application can play a major role in overall dissatisfaction with a lens. Handling for application had a similar correlation (r) value as vision, suggesting that handling for application should not be underestimated when considering overall patient satisfaction.

Evaluation of daily disposable senofilcon A contact lenses in a symptomatic population

PURPOSE

To evaluate the comfort performance of ACUVUE OASYS® 1-Day with HydraLuxe™ Technology among symptomatic contact lens wearers by using Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE) comfort scores and Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire 8 (CLDEQ-8) discomfort and dryness scores.

METHODS

Three clinical trials evaluated comfort and dryness when refitting symptomatic contact lens wearers to ACUVUE OASYS® 1-Day with HydraLuxe™ lenses. This analysis combined the CLUE comfort and CLDEQ-8 scores obtained at baseline and 2-week follow-up and compared average scores between visits. Subjects were grouped by habitual lens modality (daily disposable or daily wear reusable) and habitual lens material (silicone hydrogel or hydrogel). The analysis included data from 107 subjects.

RESULTS

Significant increases in mean CLUE comfort scores between baseline and 2-week follow-up occurred in all subject groups across habitual lens modality and material, indicating an improvement in overall comfort. CLUE comfort score improved clinically (≥5-point increase) among 75.7% of subjects (81/107). Similarly, significant decrease in mean CLDEQ-8 scores between baseline and 2-week follow-up occurred in all subject groups, indicating a decrease in the prevalence of dryness and discomfort symptoms. CLDEQ-8 score improved clinically (≥3-point reduction) among 82.2% of subjects (88/107). A majority of subjects (57.0%) became asymptomatic (CLDEQ-8 score ≤ 11 points) after 2 weeks of bilateral wear.

CONCLUSION

Refitting symptomatic contact lens patients to ACUVUE OASYS® 1-Day with HydraLuxe™ can improve overall comfort and reduce symptoms of dryness and discomfort, irrespective of the previous lens modality or habitual lens material.

Effect of Contact Lenses on Contrast Sensitivity under Various Lighting Conditions

Purpose

To assess contrast sensitivity in clear and colored soft contact lenses under different lighting conditions.

Methods

This study was performed on 34 medical students. Visual acuity was measured using a tumbling E chart at a distance of 6 m, and contrast sensitivity was determined by Pelli Robson chart at a distance of 1 m. These tests were repeated in mesopic (3 lux) and glare (2000 lux) conditions. Then, a clear contact lens was applied to one eye and a colored contact lens was applied to the other. After 2 hr, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured for each individual. The results were compared with and without contact lenses under normal, mesopic, and glare conditions.

Results

The mean refractive error was 0.44 ± 0.20 diopters. Repeated measures ANOVA showed a decline in contrast sensitivity with colored and clear contact lenses as compared to no-lens condition (P < 0.001). Additionally, lighting conditions had a significant impact on contrast sensitivity (P < 0.001); contrast sensitivity was lower in mesopic and glare conditions than under normal lighting condition.

Conclusion

In addition to the drop in contrast sensitivity under unusual lighting conditions (e.g., glare and mesopic), wearing soft contact lenses can further reduce contrast sensitivity in different lighting conditions. Therefore, people who wear contact lenses should be aware of this reduction in visual performance in conditions like driving at night or in the fog.

Stabilization of comfort and visual quality after the insertion of soft contact lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate comfort, visual function, and in vivo wettability after the insertion of hydrogel and silicone hydrogel contact lenses for a better understanding of how long practitioners should wait for the initial evaluation of soft contact lenses.

METHODS

A short-term prospective, contralateral, randomized, and participant-masked study was carried out. Twenty healthy participants (25.4 ± 2.6 years) were evaluated after the insertion of two different soft contact lenses at different times (1, 5, 10, 20, 30 min). Ocufilcon D (hydrogel) and Somofilcon A (silicone hydrogel) contact lenses were randomly assigned to both eyes of the same participant. Comfort, visual function under photopic conditions in terms of high-contrast visual acuity, low-contrast visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and in vivo wettability were measured.

RESULTS

There was an increase in comfort (p < 0.001), high-contrast visual acuity (p < 0.05), and contrast sensitivity (p < 0.001, only with silicone hydrogel) directly related to time after contact lens insertion. Besides, in vivo wettability suffered a statistically significant deterioration directly related to time with both contact lenses (p < 0.05). Except for comfort and contrast sensitivity, all the parameters stabilized their values 10 min after the insertion of both soft contact lenses. Additionally, in vivo wettability and visual acuity differences were found between hydrogel and silicone hydrogel contact lenses (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It would be possible to properly evaluate high-contrast visual acuity, low-contrast visual acuity, and in vivo wettability 10 min after the insertion of both soft contact lenses.

Usefulness of a global rating change scale for contact lens discomfort evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the usefulness of a global rate of change scale (GRCS) to detect variations in contact lens discomfort (CLD).

METHODS

Symptomatic contact lens (CL) wearers were recruited according to the 'Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire-8' (CLDEQ-8). At the baseline visit, subjects scored their comfort following insertion of their habitual CL using a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS). After 4-10 h of CL wear, comfort was again self-evaluated with the VAS and with a GRCS (range, -50 to +50). Then, a daily disposable CL (DDCL) was fitted. After one month of DDCL wear, a follow-up visit was conducted where the same evaluations as the baseline visit were performed. Changes in comfort were estimated using a Student's t-test for normal variables and the Friedman test for multiple comparisons of non-parametric variables. Internal responsiveness was measured by calculating the standardised response mean. Agreement between scales was estimated by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine (22 females and 7 males) CL wearers with a mean age of 23.4 ± 5.4 years participated in the study. There was a significant decrease in comfort at both visits detected by the GRCS (baseline = -13.58 ± 17.48, p < 0.001; follow up = -6.86 ± 12.69, p = 0.007). However, the VAS did not detect that change, either at baseline (insertion = 64.28 ± 18.72 vs removal = 52.89 ± 17.64, p = 1.000) or follow-up visit (insertion = 81.97 ± 12.91 vs removal = 76.48 ± 16.02, p = 1.000). Comfort at insertion and removal times was significantly higher with the DDCL (p = 0.008 at insertion and p = 0.004 at removal). The standardised response mean was greater with the GRCS than the VAS at baseline (0.78 vs 0.63) and follow-up (0.54 vs 0.37) visits. Agreement between both scales was moderate and significant (p < 0.001) for both visits, ICC: 0.674 (95 % confidence interval (CI):0.411-0.833) (baseline) and 0.652 (95 % CI:0.377-0.821) (follow-up visit).

CONCLUSIONS

The GRCS can detect slight changes in CL wear comfort and shows higher responsiveness than the VAS. This subjective scale can allow detection of changes in comfort in a simple and quick way.

An Amplifying Cascade of Contact Lens-Related End-of-Day Hyperaemia and Dryness Symptoms

End-of-day (EOD) symptoms of dryness are too often the cause of poor soft contact lens (SCL) tolerance and abandonment of wear. This review examines an amplifying cascade model for these symptoms, which involve thin tear layers on contact lens (CL) front surfaces being susceptible to evaporation-related short tear breakup (TBU) times. Susceptibility to faster tear loss by evaporation may be exacerbated by other forms of tear instability, such as lipid and mucin deficiencies as well as lens surface soiling. Bulbar and palpebral conjunctival hyperaemia and associated faster evaporation of warmer pre-conjunctival tears could also contribute to evaporative dry eye EOD symptoms. In CL wearers, a cascade of increasing hyperaemia toward the end of day, associated increasing tear temperature and evaporative loss, shortened TBU times (TBUTs) and increased osmolarity, all elevate the risk of higher symptom levels according to progressive amplification of this cascade. Chronic wound healing responses to SCL wear, perhaps related to limbal conjunctival trauma, stem cell deficiency and persistent epitheliopathy, as well as one or more immune responses, may contribute directly or indirectly to inflammation and the amplifying evaporative dryness cascade. A diurnal cycle that culminates in EOD symptoms appears to involve a process of recovery from causal mechanisms after lens removal, which allows lenses to be worn comfortably, at least initially the next day. Possible recovery processes are discussed in this review as are procedures that may help de-amplify an inflammatory, evaporative dryness cascade and alleviate EOD symptoms. Evidence of an accrual of adverse responses over long periods of more or less successful lens wear indicate an incremental failure to recover from EOD hyperaemia. Such incremental failure could help explain how SCL wear too often needs to be abandoned after many years of comfortable wear.

Subjective Ratings and Satisfaction in Contact Lens Wear

SIGNIFICANCE

This study shows satisfaction in contact lens (CL) wear is influenced by both comfort and vision. Eighty-six percent of participants were willing to continue with trial CL wear if satisfied with both comfort and vision, dropping to 50% if either variable was unsatisfactory and 0% if both were unsatisfactory.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between subjective ratings and satisfaction with CL wear.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of two daily-disposable CL trials (delefilcon A, somofilcon A) on participants 40 years or younger followed over 3 months. Subjective ratings (numerical rating scale 1 to 10, 1-point step) collected at visits following baseline (2 weeks, 1 and 3 months) included comfort (insertion, during day, end of day), vision clarity, and binary response for satisfaction with comfort and vision (yes/no). Willingness to continue with trial CL was obtained at completion.

RESULTS

There was no significant association of comfort on insertion with comfort satisfaction (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; P = .30); however, comfort during day (OR, 2.1; P < .001) and end of day (OR, 3.4; P < .001) was associated with comfort satisfaction. For comfort during day ratings of at least 8/10 and end of day of at least 6/10, 90% of participants were considered satisfied. There was a 14% increase in participants satisfied with comfort for each unit increase on the numerical rating scale from ratings of 3 to 8 for comfort during day and a 20% increase from ratings of 3 to 7 for comfort end of day. The percentage of satisfied participants reached its maximum at a lower end of day rating (8/10) compared with during day (10/10). The percentage of participants satisfied with vision reached its maximum (100%) at a vision rating of 9/10.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction in CL wear is influenced by both comfort and vision. A higher rating for comfort during the day compared with end of day is necessary for participants to attain satisfaction.

Daily versus monthly disposable contact lens: Which is better for ocular surface physiology and comfort?

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of soft contact lenses (SCL) wearing modality and lens materials on the changes in conjunctival bulbar and limbal redness and conjunctival and corneal staining after two months of SCL wear. Comfort level was also analyzed.

METHODS

In this longitudinal clinical trial, forty-seven neophyte myopic subjects were fitted with a monthly disposable lens (lotrafilcon-B or comfilcon-A or balafilcon-A) in one eye and a daily disposable lens (nelfilcon-A or stenofilcon-A or nesofilcon-A) in the other eye, randomly selected. Conjunctival bulbar and limbal redness and conjunctival and corneal staining were evaluated before and after lens wear. Effect of lens wearing modality and lens materials on these changes was also determined. Level of comfort was evaluated subjectively twice per day. Comfort level and reduction in end-of-day comfort were compared between different lens wearing modalities and materials.

RESULTS

Bulbar and limbal redness and conjunctival and corneal staining were increased (p<0.001) after lens wear, and changes were similar with daily and monthly disposable lens wear (p>0.05). Limbal redness was associated with lens materials, and lotrafilcon-B induced the least among the studied lenses (p<0.05). There was no significant association between the wearing modality and the average comfort level and reduction of end-of-day comfort (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Two months of SCL wear increased conjunctival redness, conjunctival and corneal staining, which were not associated with the lens wearing modality. There was a reduction in end-of-day comfort, similar to daily and monthly lenses. The change in limbal redness and reduction in end-of-day comfort were associated with the characteristics of the lens material.

Eyelid Margin and Meibomian Gland Characteristics and Symptoms in Lens Wearers

PURPOSE

To describe the lid margin characteristics of contact lens wearers and relate them to comfort during lens wear.

METHODS

Three study sites enrolled habitual contact lens wearers. Subjects completed the Comfort domain of the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE) questionnaire, and each eye was graded for the presence of mucocutaneous junction (MCJ) displacement, lid margin irregularity, and lid margin vascularity. Examiners counted the number of meibomian gland (MG) orifices in the central centimeter of the lower eyelid and the number of those that showed pouting/plugging and vascular invasion. MG expressibility was graded according to the Shimazaki schema. Subjects were grouped based on presence/absence of each characteristic, total number of orifices (≥5 vs. <5), and expressibility (grade 0 vs. >0). Descriptive statistics are reported. A linear model was used to assess the fixed effect of each characteristic on combined CLUE score and each CLUE statement, if the effect on combined CLUE score showed p < 0.10.

RESULTS

The study included 203 subjects (67.5% female) with mean age (±SD) of 30.3 ± 9.6 years. The most commonly observed characteristics were orifice pouting/plugging, compromised MG expressibility, and lid margin vascularity (35.0, 30.3, and 20.4%, respectively). MCJ displacement and MG expressibility had an effect on the combined CLUE score such that individual CLUE statements were analyzed (p = 0.01 and p = 0.06, respectively). MCJ displacement had an effect on comfort upon insertion (p = 0.01), comfort after 5 minutes (p = 0.03), end-of-day comfort (p = 0.01), and ability to maintain ocular moisture (p = 0.030). MG expressibility had a significant effect on general comfort (p = 0.01), comfort throughout the day (p = 0.02), and the ability to maintain ocular moisture (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

MCJ displacement and MG expressibility have an effect on contact lens comfort.

TFOS DEWS II iatrogenic report

Dry eye can be caused by a variety of iatrogenic interventions. The increasing number of patients looking for eye care or cosmetic procedures involving the eyes, together with a better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms of dry eye disease (DED), have led to the need for a specific report about iatrogenic dry eye within the TFOS DEWS II. Topical medications can cause DED due to their allergic, toxic and immuno-inflammatory effects on the ocular surface. Preservatives, such as benzalkonium chloride, may further aggravate DED. A variety of systemic drugs can also induce DED secondary to multiple mechanisms. Moreover, the use of contact lens induces or is associated with DED. However, one of the most emblematic situations is DED caused by surgical procedures such as corneal refractive surgery as in laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and keratoplasty due to mechanisms intrinsic to the procedure (i.e. corneal nerve cutting) or even by the use of postoperative topical drugs. Cataract surgery, lid surgeries, botulinum toxin application and cosmetic procedures are also considered risk factors to iatrogenic DED, which can cause patient dissatisfaction, visual disturbance and poor surgical outcomes. This report also presents future directions to address iatrogenic DED, including the need for more in-depth epidemiological studies about the risk factors, development of less toxic medications and preservatives, as well as new techniques for less invasive eye surgeries. Novel research into detection of early dry eye prior to surgeries, efforts to establish appropriate therapeutics and a greater attempt to regulate and oversee medications, preservatives and procedures should be considered.

Impact of Contact Lens Material, Design, and Fitting on Discomfort

OBJECTIVE

To review the effect of contact lens (CL) material, design, and fitting characteristics on CL discomfort.

METHODS

A PubMed search identified publications describing subjective comfort and CL material, fitting, and design parameters. The review included clinical signs associated with discomfort that may be a consequence of these parameters.

RESULTS

Reduced lens movement or more CL tightness were associated with improved comfort. Increased lens-induced paralimbal conjunctival staining and indentation, considered as quasi-indicators of CL fitting or edge design, were also associated with better comfort. No recent studies have evaluated varying CL design parameters and subjective comfort. Silicone hydrogel CLs are no different in comfort compared with hydrogel CLs. Lower equilibrium water content is associated with improved comfort in hydrogel CL wear. Coefficient of friction shows promise as a material factor potentially associated with comfort. Lid wiper epitheliopathy and lid-parallel conjunctival folds have been linked with comfort in established wearers.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent studies have confirmed the association between more mobile CLs and more discomfort, whereas closer conformity of the CL to the bulbar conjunctiva improved subjective comfort. There is no evidence to support the perceived comfort difference between silicone hydrogel and hydrogel CL. There has been limited progress in understanding the impact of varying specific CL design parameters. Although specific clinical signs may be predictive of discomfort, their role in the natural history of discomfort remains unclear. A better understanding of the relationship between coefficient of friction and comfort and strategies to improve lubricity may hold promise for limiting CL discomfort.

Differences in Dry Eye Questionnaire Symptoms in Two Different Modalities of Contact Lens Wear: Silicone-Hydrogel in Daily Wear Basis and Overnight Orthokeratology

Purpose. To compare the ocular surface symptoms and signs in an adult population of silicone-hydrogel (Si-Hy) contact lens (CL) wearers with another modality of CL wear, overnight orthokeratology (OK). Materials and Methods. This was a prospective and comparative study in which 31 myopic subjects were fitted with the same Si-Hy CL and 23 underwent OK treatment for 3 months. Dry eye questionnaire (DEQ) was filled in at the beginning of the study and then after 15 days, 1 month, and 3 months using each CL modality. The tear quality was evaluated with noninvasive tear break-up time. Tear production was measured with Schirmer test. Tear samples were collected with Schirmer strips being frozen to analyze the dinucleotide diadenosine tetraphosphate (Ap₄A) concentration with High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). Results. After refitting with ortho-k, a reduction in discomfort and dryness symptoms at the end of the day (p < 0.05, χ²) was observed. No significant changes were observed in Ap₄A concentration in any group. Bulbar redness, limbal redness, and conjunctival staining increased significantly in the Si-Hy group (p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test). Conclusion. Discomfort and dryness symptoms at the end of the day are lower in the OK CL group than in the Si-Hy CL group.

Lid wiper epitheliopathy

Some recent research has resulted in a hypothesis that there is a common 'lid wiper' region that is apposite to the ocular surface or anterior lens surface (where contact lenses are worn), responsible for spreading tears during blinking. In the upper eyelid, it extends about 0.6 mm from the crest of the sharp posterior (inner) lid border (i.e. the mucocutaneous junction, or line of Marx) to the subtarsal fold superiorly and from the medial upper punctum to the lateral canthus horizontally. Histologically, it is seen as an epithelial elevation comprising of stratified epithelium with a transitional conjunctival structure of (moving posteriorly) squamous cells then cuboidal cells, with some parakeratinised cells and goblet cells. Lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) denotes staining of the lid wiper observed after instillation of dyes such as fluorescein, rose bengal or lissamine green. There have been some reports of higher rates of LWE in dry eye patients and contact lens wearers, but others have failed to find such associations. The primary cause of LWE is thought to be increased friction between the lid wiper and ocular or anterior contact lens surface due to inadequate lubrication, which could be caused by dry eye and may be exacerbated by factors such as abnormal blinking patterns, poor contact lens surface lubricity and adverse environmental influences. Recent evidence suggests that LWE is associated with sub-clinical inflammation. LWE has the potential to provide the missing mechanistic link between clinical observation and symptoms associated with dry eye and contact lens wear. Clinical and fundamental research into LWE is still in its infancy and in many instances equivocal; however, it is an idea that provides a potentially important new avenue for further investigation of anterior eye discomfort associated with ocular dryness and contact lens wear.

Ocular discomfort responses after short periods of contact lens wear

PURPOSE

To investigate if contact lens-related discomfort is a function of the time of day at which lenses are worn.

METHODS

This was a randomized, crossover, open-label clinical trial where subjective responses, with and without contact lenses, were assessed every 2 hours during five stages (A to E). Each stage began at the time when subjects would normally have inserted their contact lenses (T0). During stage A, no lenses were worn, whereas in stage B, lenses were worn continuously for 12 hours. In stages C to E, lenses were worn for only 4 hours. Contact lenses were inserted at T0 for stage C, but for stages D and E, lenses were not inserted until T0 + 4 and T0 + 8 hours, respectively. Mixed linear models were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In the absence of contact lenses, ocular comfort and dryness remained reasonably constant throughout the observation period. Ocular comfort and dryness decreased during 12 hours of continuous lens wear and became significantly worse from the 8-hour time onward compared with insertion (p < 0.023). There were no significant differences in terms of ocular comfort and dryness between any of the 4-hour lens wear stages (p < 0.82). During each 4-hour stage, both comfort and dryness behaved in a similar fashion (p > 0.05) to the first 4 hours of continuous contact lens wear. Comparing the scores of each of these stages with the no-lens response at the corresponding time showed no significant differences for comfort (p > 0.23) or dryness (p > 0.37).

CONCLUSIONS

Short periods of wear can be experienced at any time of day without significant change in ocular discomfort and dryness. This suggests that subjective responses at the end of the day are determined by the length of time lenses are in contact with the eye, rather than the time of day at which lenses are worn.

Effect of Three Interventions on Contact Lens Comfort in Symptomatic Wearers: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To investigate whether carrying out various interventions part way through the day influences comfort in symptomatic daily disposable (DD) contact lens wearers.

Methods

A subject-masked, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in thirty symptomatic soft lens wearers who wore their habitual DD contact lenses bilaterally for 12 h on two separate days. Five hours after lens application, one of the following three interventions or a control was performed on each eye: replacing the existing lens with a new lens; removing and reapplying the same lens; performing a ‘scleral swish’; and no action (control). Comfort scores were recorded using SMS text messages every hour following lens application using a 0 (causes pain) to 100 (excellent comfort) scale. Comfort scores before lens application, at 6 mins post-application, and at 6 mins post-intervention were also recorded.

Results

There was a significant reduction in comfort from pre-lens application to 6 mins post-application for all groups (all p<0.05). Comfort gradually decreased from 6 mins to 5 h after lens application for each group (p<0.0001) with no significant difference between groups over the 5-h period (p = 0.09). There was no significant difference in comfort 6 mins post-intervention for any group (all p>0.05). After the intervention, comfort continued to decline (p<0.0001) with slightly lower mean scores for the control group compared to the new lens group (p = 0.003). Change in comfort relative to pre-intervention (5 h) was similar for all groups (p = 0.81). There was no difference in comfort at 12 h between groups (p = 0.83).

Conclusion

This work has confirmed that comfort shows a continual and significant decline over a 12-h wearing period in symptomatic DD contact lens wearers. None of the interventions investigated had any significant impact on end-of-day comfort. These data suggest discomfort in lens wearers is more heavily influenced by changes to the ocular environment rather than to the lens itself.

Trial Registration

Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN10419752 http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN10419752

Common symptoms of Nepalese soft contact lens wearers: A pilot study

AIM

To determine the common symptoms in current soft contact lens (CL) wearers and their association with other factors among Nepalese population.

METHODS

All the current CL wearers who started to wear soft CL in Nepal Eye Hospital between July 2007 and June 2012 were invited for the participation. Frequency of the ten most common symptoms, divided into never, occasionally, frequently and consistent were recorded. Association between degree of symptoms with other factors, e.g. age, gender, profession, cigarette smoking, ethnicity, level of education and duration and wearing modality of CL wear were analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 129 subjects participated in this study, 67% were female; the mean age of the subjects was 23.9±4.3 years. Ninety seven percent of them had at least one symptom occasionally or frequently or consistently. Discomfort was found in 88.4% of the total subjects. Other common symptoms were foreign body sensation in 73.6%, redness in 65.9%, reduced wearing time in 63.6% and dryness in 62.8%. Symptoms were found occasionally in the majority of subjects. Degree of symptoms was not associated with age, gender, profession, education status, ethnicity of subjects and duration or modality of lens wear (p>0.05) but was positively associated with passive cigarette smoking (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Almost all of the Nepalese soft CL wearers had some types of symptoms at least occasionally. Discomfort was the most common symptom. Degree of symptoms was associated with the passive smoking but not with other factors like age, sex, profession and duration of lens wear.

Performance of three multipurpose disinfecting solutions with a silicone hydrogel contact lens

Purpose. To evaluate the clinical performance of a silicone hydrogel (Si-Hy) soft contact lens (CL) in combination with three different multipurpose disinfecting solutions (MPDSs). Methods. This was a prospective, randomized, single-masked, crossover, and comparative study in which 31 habitual soft CL wearers were randomly assigned to one of the three MPDSs (Synergi, COMPLETE RevitaLens, and OPTI-FREE PureMoist) for 1 month with a 1-week wash-out period between each exposure. All subjects were successfully refitted with a Si-Hy CL (Biofinity). Subjects were then scheduled for follow-up visits after 1 month of lens wear, being evaluated at 2 and 8 hours after lens insertion. Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) were used to gauge comfort rating. Results. The tarsal conjunctiva showed a significantly different degree of lid redness between the MPDSs at the 2-hour visit (P < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test), being lower for COMPLETE RevitaLens compared to the other two MPDSs (Mann-Whitney U test). Furthermore, a significantly different degree of lid roughness at the 8-hour visit was seen (P < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test), being higher for Synergi (Mann-Whitney U test). The subjective comfort was similar with the three MPDSs. Conclusion. Tarsal conjunctival response should be also considered in the context of the clinical performance of MPDs at the ocular surface.

How contact lens comfort may be influenced by psychiatric and psychological conditions and mechanisms

End-of-day soft contact lens awareness, dryness and discomfort are common related problems and may be associated with lens surface dryness and soiling as well as signs of ocular discomfort. Similar symptoms may be reported by patients who do not have obviously degraded lenses or ocular signs of discomfort. This review examines some psychiatric and psychological conditions and mechanisms which may predispose toward or enhance the likelihood of these symptoms occurring and becoming a problem. For example, conditions such as depression, anxiety and stress may lower the threshold for the perception of discomfort. Chronic ocular inflammation associated with contact lens wear may result in neuroplastic lowering of nociceptive thresholds and enhancement of the perception of discomfort. End-of-day tiredness and reduced levels of demand from top-down activity may make it harder to maintain goal-relevant attention and the associated ability to inhibit sensory stimuli (such as lens awareness) that would otherwise not capture attention. Lens surface lubricity experienced on lens insertion may be higher than normal for corneal or conjunctival surfaces and create expectations of very high comfort levels, which are not apparent after lens surface dehydration, soiling or other lens changes have accumulated during the day. Psychiatric and psychological conditions and mechanisms may not only contribute to the perception of discomfort, when the lens and ocular condition appear normal but also may contribute to the perception of discomfort, when lens surface drying and soiling are evident and/or discomfort such as chronic ocular inflammation is apparent.

Are silicone hydrogel contact lenses more comfortable than hydrogel contact lenses?

The current literature review was intended to investigate whether the use of silicone hydrogel contact lenses has resulted in improved comfort compared with that of hydrogel contact lenses when both are used for daily wear. The conclusion reached is that silicone hydrogel contact lenses, which were initially developed to eliminate hypoxia during overnight wear, have not significantly improved comfort compared with the comfort achieved with hydrogel contact lenses when worn on a daily wear basis, even though a body of the published literature would suggest to the contrary. A careful review and consideration of the literature demonstrates that the relative comfort achieved with the two types of contact lenses is in fact highly dependent on the study methodology: Although refitting studies have concluded enhanced comfort with silicone hydrogels, the more robust study designs involving concurrent controls and masking were not able to show a difference, and some even concluded an inferior performance. Evidence-based review has however clearly demonstrated that comfort cannot be considered in isolation but is contact lens specific and depends on the material surface and bulk properties, lens design characteristics, and modality of use of the contact lens, and may also be significantly influenced by the replacement frequency and interaction with any lens care system that may be used.