Ocular surface comfort during the day assessed by instant reporting in different types of contact and non-contact lens wearers.

OBJECTIVE: To compare instant reporting of comfort throughout the day in hydrogel, silicone-hydrogel, gas-permeable, and non-contact lens wearers. METHODS: More than twenty subjects were recruited per group. Comfort scores were recorded using short message service (text message) in the morning (9:00-11:00 am), afternoon (2:00-4:00 pm), and night (7:00-9:00 pm) using a 0 (causes pain) to 100 (excellent) scale. RESULTS: The pooled comfort scores across all groups and time periods revealed that data are skewed toward high values: 88% of the scores felt between >or=70 and 100, whereas the remaining 12% felt between >or=40 and <70. Comfort changed significantly over time (P=0.003), but no significant differences were found between groups (P=0.66) or in the interaction between time and group (P=0.79). Hydrogel and silicone-hydrogel contact lens-wearing groups showed similar reductions in afternoon (-4.5 +/- 11.8 and -4.5 +/- 8.6, respectively) and night comfort scores (-8.3 +/- 14.1 and -9.1 +/- 8.7, respectively), and these were greater than those found in gas-permeable and non-contact lens wearers both in the afternoon (-1.0 +/- 11.3 and -1.8 +/- 16.3, respectively) and night (-7.3 +/- 9.7 and -4.1 +/- 21.9, respectively). DISCUSSION: Hydrogel and silicone-hydrogel contact lens wearers' comfort scores are reduced at night compared with morning. The slight comfort reduction at night versus morning found in non-contact lens wearers might be related to ocular or general physical fatigue, which suggest the possibility that reduced end-of-day comfort reported by contact lens wearers might not be solely related to contact lens wear. The results of this study also suggest that interpretation of comfort scores should be carried out with caution.

Drug-induced ocular side-effects with isotretinoin.

Whereas there are numerous reported ocular side-effects from isotretinoin medication, we present the first case report of corneal steepening after systemic treatment with isotretinoin for seven and a half weeks. The case was associated with a significant drop in visual acuity which could not be explained from the refractive error change. All signs and symptoms were absent seven and a half weeks after the medication was withdrawn. The case indicates that eye care professionals need to be vigilant about the possibility of adverse ocular manifestations associated with the use of systemic medications.

Compatibility of two new silicone hydrogel contact lenses with three soft contact lens multipurpose solutions*.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess corneal staining and subjective symptom ratings with six different silicone hydrogel contact lens/multipurpose solution combinations, including the recently launched Menicon PremiO silicone hydrogel contact lens, after the first night of soaking the lenses in solution. METHODS: This study is a prospective, single-centre, subject-masked, contralateral, crossover, daily wear clinical trial in which subjects were randomly fitted in the morning with a different lens/solution combination in each eye, asked to wear the lenses for the whole day (at least 12 h), soak each of the lenses overnight in one of the test solutions and insert the lenses on the following morning. Subjects were asked to come on that morning for assessment of corneal staining and subjective ratings. All subjects repeated this procedure on another two occasions in order to collect the results of the six different lens/solution combinations: Menicon PremiO/MeniCare Soft; Menicon PremiO/Complete 10; Menicon PremiO/OptiFree Express; Acuvue Oasys/MeniCare Soft; Acuvue Oasys/Complete 10; Acuvue Oasys/OptiFree Express. RESULTS: Menicon PremiO lenses were associated with a lower level of corneal staining overall, and in the nasal and temporal locations, compared with Acuvue Oasys lenses (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in corneal staining between solutions (p > 0.05). An overall rate of solution-induced corneal staining per eye of 12% was found. Symptoms were very similar among the six different lens/solution combinations (p > 0.05). DISCUSSION: The lower level of corneal staining found with Menicon PremiO lenses compared with Acuvue Oasys lenses might be attributed to material, surface and design differences between lens types. The overall rate of solution-induced corneal staining and symptomatology found between the different lens/solutions combinations is consistent with previous studies.

The clinical investigation of the base curve and comfort rate of a new prototype silicone hydrogel contact lens.

PURPOSE: To compare the lens fitting characteristics and comfort rates between the two base curves of a prototype silicone hydrogel contact lens and between the prototype and a senofilcon A contact lens. METHODS: This study was a prospective, single-center, masked, controlled, randomized, contralateral-eye, short-term comparison clinical trial consisting of two different studies. In the first study, subjects were randomly fitted with the 8.3- and 8.6-mm base curves of a prototype contact lens in each eye. In the second study, subjects were randomly fitted with the more comfortable prototype lens found in the first study in one eye and a senolfilcon A lens in the other eye. In both studies, lens centration and movement, corneal coverage, and comfort were assessed in both eyes 15 minutes after insertion for each lens separately. RESULTS: The overall fit of the 8.3 base curve (8.08 +/- 1.98) was similar to that of the 8.6 base curve (8.15 +/- 2.09) (P=0.38). The mean comfort scores for the 8.3 and 8.6 base curves were 80.13 +/- 16.08 and 77.33 +/- 18.00, respectively (P=0.47). The overall fit of the prototype lens (8.79 +/- 1.56) was similar to that of the senofilcon A lens (8.63 +/- 1.20 mm) (P=0.29). The mean comfort scores for the prototype and senofilcon A lenses were 84.67 +/- 13.92 and 86.35 +/- 12.20, respectively (P=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: The slightly better lens fitting characteristics and comfort of the lens with the 8.3 base curve versus the 8.6 base curve are attributed to the lower movement of the lens with the 8.3 base curve. That the lens fitting characteristics and comfort rates of the prototype lens and the senofilcon A lens were similar is not surprising, because of their similarities in material and design.