4.5 Article

The influence of end of day silicone hydrogel daily disposable contact lens fit on ocular comfort, physiology and lens wettability

Journal

CONTACT LENS & ANTERIOR EYE
Volume 38, Issue 5, Pages 339-344

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2015.03.010

Keywords

Contact lenses; Daily disposables; Silicone-hydrogel; Objective lens fit; Lens substitution

Categories

Funding

  1. Alcon Laboratories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To quantify the end-of-day silicone-hydrogel daily disposable contact lens fit and its influence of on ocular comfort, physiology and lens wettability. Methods: Thirty-nine subjects (22.1 +/- 3.5 years) were randomised to wear each of 3 silicone-hydrogel daily-disposable contact lenses (narafilcon A, delefilcon A and filcon II 3), bilaterally, for one week. Lens fit was assessed objectively using a digital video slit-lamp at 8, 12 and 16h after lens insertion. Hyperaemia, non-invasive tear break-up time, tear meniscus height and comfort were also evaluated at these timepoints, while corneal and conjunctival staining were assessed on lens removal. Results: Lens fit assessments were not different between brands (P > 0.05), with the exception of the movement at blink where narafilcon A was more mobile. Overall, lag reduced but push-up speed increased from 8 to 12h (P< 0.05), but remained stable from 12 to 16h (P > 0.05). Movement-on-blink was unaffected by wear-time (F=0.403, P = 0.670). A more mobile lens fit with one brand did not indicate that person would have a more mobile fit with another brand (r= 0.06 to 0.63). Lens fit was not correlated with comfort, ocular physiology or lens wettability (P > 0.01). Conclusions: Among the lenses tested, objective lens fit changed between 8 h and 12 h of lens wear. The weak correlation in individual lens fit between brands indicates that fit is dependent on more than ocular shape. Consequently, substitution of a different lens brand with similar parameters will not necessarily provide comparable lens fit. (C) 2015 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available