4.5 Article

Role of diurnal variation of corneal sensory processing in contact lens discomfort

Journal

OCULAR SURFACE
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages 770-776

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2020.08.007

Keywords

Diurnal variation; Corneal sensory processing; Ocular discomfort; Contact lens

Categories

Funding

  1. CooperVision Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To examine the diurnal variation of corneal threshold and suprathreshold sensory processing, symptoms, and tear secretion in symptomatic and asymptomatic contact lens (CL) wearers and controls. Methods: 26 symptomatic and 25 asymptomatic CL wearers and 15 asymptomatic non-CL wearing controls participated. Cooling thresholds, symptoms and tear meniscus height (TMH) were measured on each of 3 measurement days (random order) on the following schedules; Day-1 within 1 h of awakening (Baseline) and 3, 6 and 9 h later, Day-2 baseline and 9 h later (CLs worn in CL group) and Day-3 baseline and 9 h later. Magnitudes estimates for threshold-scaled suprathreshold stimuli were also estimated on Day-3. Data were analyzed using mixed models and repeated measures ANOVA. Results: Cooling thresholds for the symptomatic group were lower and decreased over Day-1 (p < 0.008) and after 8 h of CL wear on Day-2 (p < 0.001) and were paralleled by increased symptoms (all p < 0.001), whereas minimal variations were found in the asymptomatic and control groups. Magnitude estimates for suprathreshold stimuli were higher (p <= 0.002) in the symptomatic group but did not differ significantly over the day. TMH varied little over time and was lower in the symptomatic group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Corneal sensitivity and symptoms, but not TMH, increased diurnally irrespective of CL wear in symptomatic CL wearers. These results reveal the essential role of neurosensory abnormalities in CL discomfort and suggest involvement of a central mechanism in the diurnally increased symptoms of these patients.

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