Treatment, material, care, and patient-related factors in contact lens-related dry eye

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 85, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 764-772

  Ramamoorthy, Padmapriya ^a   Sinnott, Loraine T ^a   Nichols, Jason J ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Care solutions; Contact lenses; Dry eye disease; Symptoms; Treatments

Indexed keywords

CARE SOLUTIONS; CASE-CONTROL STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTACT LENS WEAR; DRY EYE; DRY EYE DISEASE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HIGH WATER CONTENT; LENS MATERIALS; LENS WEAR; LOGISTIC REGRESSIONS; MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS; OCULAR DISCOMFORTS; ODDS RATIOS; STATISTICAL MODELS; SYMPTOMS; TREATMENTS;

CONTACT LENSES; CURING; MATERIALS; PATIENT TREATMENT; WATER CONTENT;

OPTICAL INSTRUMENTS;

ARTIFICIAL TEAR; CONTACT LENS SOLUTION; BIOMATERIAL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CONTACT LENS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DRY EYE; EYE CARE; EYE DISCOMFORT; FEMALE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; HYDROGEL; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL MODEL; WATER CONTENT; HYDROPHILIC CONTACT LENS; PROSTHESIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; RISK FACTOR; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CONTACT LENS SOLUTIONS; CONTACT LENSES, HYDROPHILIC; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DRY EYE SYNDROMES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FITTING; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 52049117237     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e318181a91f     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, Nichols KK, Chalmers R, Begley C. The performance of the contact lens dry eye questionnaire as a screening survey for contact lens-related dry eye. Cornea 2002;21:469-75.
2. Doughty MJ, Fonn D, Richter D, Simpson T, Caffery B, Gordon K. A patient questionnaire approach to estimating the prevalence of dry eye symptoms in patients presenting to optometric practices across Canada. Optom Vis Sci 1997;74:624-31.
3. Brennan NA, Efron N. Symptomatology of HEMA contact lens wear. Optom Vis Sci 1989;66:834-8.
4. Guillon M, Styles E, Guillon JP, Maissa C. Preocular tear film characteristics of nonwearers and soft contact lens wearers. Optom Vis Sci 1997;74:273-9.
5. Begley CG, Caffery B, Nichols KK, Chalmers R. Responses of contact lens wearers to a dry eye survey. Optom Vis Sci 2000;77:40-6.
6. Begley CG, Chalmers RL, Mitchell GL, Nichols KK, Caffery B, Simpson T, DuToit R, Portello J, Davis L. Characterization of ocular surface symptoms from optometric practices in North America. Cornea 2001;20:610-8.
7. Timberlake GT, Doane MG, Bertera JH. Short-term, low-contrast visual acuity reduction associated with in vivo contact lens drying. Optom Vis Sci 1992;69:755-60.
8. Gellatly KW, Brennan NA, Efron N. Visual decrement with deposit accumulation of HEMA contact lenses. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988;65:937-41.
9. Pritchard N, Fonn D, Brazeau D. Discontinuation of contact lens wear: a survey. Int Contact Lens Clin 1999;26:157-62.
10. Bruinsma GM, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ. Bacterial adhesion to surface hydrophilic and hydrophobic contact lenses. Biomaterials 2001;22:3217-24.
11. Ladage PM, Yamamoto K, Ren DH, Li L, Jester JV, Petroll WM, Cavanagh HD. Effects of rigid and soft contact lens daily wear on corneal epithelium, tear lactate dehydrogenase, and bacterial binding to exfoliated epithelial cells. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1279-88.
12. Richdale K, Sinnott LT, Skadahl E, Nichols JJ. Frequency of and factors associated with contact lens dissatisfaction and discontinuation. Cornea 2007;26:168-74.
13. Pritchard N, Fonn D. Dehydration, lens movement and dryness ratings of hydrogel contact lenses. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1995;15: 281-6.
14. Schlanger JL. A study of contact lens failures. J Am Optom Assoc 1993;64:220-4.
15. Lemp MA. Report of the National Eye Institute/Industry workshop on clinical trials in dry eyes. CLAO J 1995;21:221-32.
16. Schultz CL, Kunert KS. Interleukin-6 levels in tears of contact lens wearers. J Interferon Cytokine Res 2000;20:309-10.
17. Pisella PJ, Malet F, Lejeune S, Brignole F, Debbasch C, Bara J, Rat P, Colin J, Baudouin C. Ocular surface changes induced by contact lens wear. Cornea 2001;20:820-5.
18. Willcox MD, Lan J. Secretory immunoglobulin A in tears:functions and changes during contact lens wear. Clin Exp Optom 1999;82:1-3.
19. Mackie IA. Contact lenses in dry eyes. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K 1985;104(Pt 4):477-83.
20. Gilbard JP, Gray KL, Rossi SR. A proposed mechanism for increased tear-film osmolarity in contact lens wearers. Am J Ophthalmol 1986; 102:505-7.
21. Thai LC, Tomlinson A, Simmons PA. In vitro and in vivo effects of a lubricant in a contact lens solution. Ophthal Physiol Opt 2002;22: 319-29.
22. Guillon M, Guillon JP. Hydrogel lens wettability during overnight wear. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1989;9:355-9.
23. Guillon JP, Guillon M, Dwyer S, Mapstone V. Hydrogel lens in vivo wettability. Trans Br Contact Lens Assoc Conf 1989;6:44-5.
24. Holly FJ, Refojo MF. Wettability of hydrogels. I. Poly (2-hydroxy-ethyl methacrylate). J Biomed Mater Res 1975;9:315-26.
25. Hatfield RO, Jordan DR, Bennett ES, Henry VA, Marohn JW, Morgan BW. Initial comfort and surface wettability: a comparison between different contact lens materials. J Am Optom Assoc 1993;64: 271-3.
26. Nichols JJ, Sinnott LT. Tear film, contact lens, and patient-related factors associated with contact lens-related dry eye. Invest Ophthal-mol Vis Sci 2006;47:1319-28.
27. Nichols JJ, Ziegler C, Mitchell GL, Nichols KK. Self-reported dry eye disease across refractive modalities. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005; 46:1911-4.
28. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, Nichols KK. An assessment of self-reported disease classification in epidemiological studies of dry eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:3453-7.
29. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2000.
30. Pritchard N, Young G, Coleman S, Hunt C. Subjective and objective measures of corneal staining related to multipurpose care systems. Contact Lens Anterior Eye 2003;26:3-9.
31. Young G, Veys J, Pritchard N, Coleman S. A multi-centre study of lapsed contact lens wearers. Ophthal Physiol Opt 2002;22:516-27.
32. Efron N, Brennan NA. A survey of wearers of low water content hydrogel contact lenses. Clin Exp Optom 1988;71:86-90.
33. Fonn D, Situ P, Simpson T. Hydrogel lens dehydration and subjective comfort and dryness ratings in symptomatic and asymptomatic contact lens wearers. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:700-4.
34. Fonn D. Targeting contact lens induced dryness and discomfort: what properties will make lenses more comfortable. Optom Vis Sci 2007;84:279-85.
35. Rapp J, Broich JR. Lipid deposits on worn soft contact lenses. CLAO J 1984;10:235-9.
36. Jones L, Evans K, Sariri R, Franklin V, Tighe B. Lipid and protein deposition of N-vinyl pyrrolidone-containing group II and group IV frequent replacement contact lenses. CLAO J 1997;23:122-6.
37. Hart DE. Influence of contact lens material surface characteristics and replacement frequency on protein and lipid deposition. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:616-7.
38. Jones L, Mann A, Evans K, Franklin V, Tighe B. An in vivo comparison of the kinetics of protein and lipid deposition on group II and group IV frequent-replacement contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 2000; 77:503-10.
39. Lorentz H, Jones L. Lipid deposition on hydrogel contact lenses: how history can help us today. Optom Vis Sci 2007;84:286-95.
40. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, King-Smith PE. The impact of contact lens care solutions on the thickness of the tear film and contact lens. Cornea 2005;24:825-32.