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

Contact Lens and Anterior Eye

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 339-344

  Wolffsohn, James ^a   Hall, Lee ^b   Mroczkowska, Stephanie ^c   Hunt, Olivia A ^a   Bilkhu, Paramdeep ^a   Drew, Tom ^a   Sheppard, Amy ^a  

^a ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b Visioncare Research Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

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

Indexed keywords

SILICON; HYDROGEL; SILICONE DERIVATIVE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTACT LENS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE COMPARISON; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYDROGEL; LENS WETTABILITY; MALE; OCULAR COMFORT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCT PARAMETERS; SILICONE HYDROGEL DAILY DISPOSABLE CONTACT LENS; VISUAL SYSTEM FUNCTION; YOUNG ADULT; CHEMISTRY; DEVICE FAILURE ANALYSIS; DISPOSABLE EQUIPMENT; HYDROPHILIC CONTACT LENS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHETIC FITTING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ACUITY; WETTABILITY;

CONTACT LENSES, HYDROPHILIC; DISPOSABLE EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYDROGELS; MALE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FITTING; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; SILICONES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ACUITY; WETTABILITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84940893795     PISSN: 13670484     EISSN: 14765411     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2015.03.010     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Riley C., Young G., Chalmers R. Prevalence of ocular surface symptoms, signs, and uncomfortable hours of wear in contact lens wearers: the effect of refitting with daily-wear silicone hydrogel lenses (senofilcon a). Eye Cont Lens 2006, 32:281-286.
2. Begley C.G., Chalmers R.L., Mitchell G.L., Nichols K.K., Caffery B., Simpson T., et al. Characterization of ocular surface symptoms from optometric practices in North America. Cornea 2001, 20:610-618.
3. Long B., McNally J. The clinical performance of a silicone hydrogel lens for daily wear in an Asian population. Eye Cont Lens 2006, 32:65-71.
4. Maruyama K., Yokoi N., Takamata A., Kinoshita S. Effect of environmental conditions on tear dynamics in soft contact lens wearers. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004, 45:2563-2568.
5. Peterson R.C., Wolffsohn J.S., Nick J., Winterton L., Lally J. Clinical performance of daily disposable soft contact lenses using sustained release technology. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2006, 29:127-134.
6. Wolffsohn J.S., Hunt O.A., Chowdhury A. Objective clinical performance of 'comfort-enhanced' daily disposable soft contact lenses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2010, 33:88-92.
7. Riley C., Chalmers R.L., Pence N. The impact of lens choice in the relief of contact lens related symptoms and ocular surface findings. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2005, 28:13-19.
8. Pritchard N., Fonn D., Brazeau D. Discontinuation of contact lens wear: a survey. Int Cont Lens Clin 1999, 26:157-162.
9. Santodomingo-Rubido J., Barrado-Navascues E., Rubido-Crespo M.J. Ocular surface comfort during the day assessed by instant reporting in different types of contact and non-contact lens wearers. Eye Cont Lens 2010, 36:96-100.
10. Fonn D., Dumbleton K. Dryness and discomfort with silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Eye Cont Lens 2003, 29:S101-S104. (discussion S15-8, S92-4).
11. Papas E.B., Tilia D., Tomlinson D., Williams J., Chan E., Chan J., et al. Consequences of wear interruption for discomfort with contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 2014, 91:24-31.
12. Willcox M.D., Phillips B., Ozkan J., Jalbert I., Meagher L., Gengenbach T., et al. Interactions of lens care with silicone hydrogel lenses and effect on comfort. Optom Vis Sci 2010, 87:839-846.
13. Keir N., Woods C.A., Dumbleton K., Jones L. Clinical performance of different care systems with silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2010, 33:189-195.
14. Dumbleton K., Woods C., Jones L., Richter D., Fonn D. Comfort and vision with silicone hydrogel lenses: effect of compliance. Optom Vis Sci 2010, 87:421-425.
15. Sorbara L., Peterson R., Woods C., Fonn D. Multipurpose disinfecting solutions and their interactions with a silicone hydrogel lens. Eye Cont Lens 2009, 35:92-97.
16. Wolffsohn J.S., Hunt O.A., Basra A.K. Simplified recording of soft contact lens fit. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2009, 32:37-42.
17. Wolffsohn J.S., Purslow C. Clinical monitoring of ocular physiology using digital image analysis. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2003, 26:27-35.
18. Tranoudis I., Efron N. Parameter stability of soft contact lenses made from different materials. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2004, 27:115-131.
19. Hall L.A., Young G., Wolffsohn J.S., Riley C. The influence of corneoscleral topography on soft contact lens fit. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011, 52:6801-6806.
20. Hall L.A., Hunt C., Young G., Wolffsohn J. Factors affecting corneoscleral topography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2013, 54:3691-3701.
21. Young G., Coleman S. Poorly fitting soft lenses affect ocular integrity. CLAO J 2001, 27:68-74.
22. Papas E. On the relationship between soft contact lens oxygen transmissibility and induced limbal hyperaemia. Exp Eye Res 1998, 67:125-131.
23. Maissa C., Guillon M., Garofalo R.J. Contact lens-induced circumlimbal staining in silicone hydrogel contact lenses worn on a daily wear basis. Eye Cont Lens 2012, 38:16-26.
24. Best N., Drury L., Wolffsohn J.S. Clinical evaluation of the Oculus Keratograph. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2012, 35:171-174.