ABSTRACT
Colour vision is an important aspect of visual function that might help individuals in doing daily activities. Some occupations require and test for good colour discrimination. We describe a case of a 20-year-old man who was referred to our centre to establish if he had colour vision deficiency (CVD). He had been tested for this twice as part of his assessment to enter the police force. At the first examination, he had normal colour vision, while the second examination revealed CVD, thus the patient was referred for confirmation. Colour vision tests using the Ishihara plates showed normal results with each eye, while a Roth test revealed an unspecified CVD in the right eye and deuteranopia in the left eye. During the evaluation, we noticed he was using a red-tinted contact lens in the right eye, and was wearing a red mask with transparent red plastic in the upper part. After removal of the contact lens and mask, he was asked to repeat the examinations and it revealed deuteranopia in both eyes. A tinted contact lens is a corrective device that can help to enhance colour discrimination in CVD subjects. However, in this case the tinted contact lens was used inappropriately to manipulate the colour vision examination. We highlight the case to raise awareness that the use of red contact lenses and red filters can mask CVD.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Concerns regarding the safety of cosmetically tinted contact lenses have been reported in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the safety of cosmetically tinted contact lenses in a large number of patients across six clinical trials that varied from 1 week to 3 months in duration. METHODS: LENSES TESTED INCLUDED: Naturelle limbal ring daily disposable, Lacelle limbal ring daily disposable, Lacelle colored cosmetic daily disposable, Lacelle limbal ring planned replacement at 2 weeks, and Alamode traditional/annual colored cosmetic lens. The primary safety outcome was slit-lamp examination, including epithelial edema, epithelial microcysts, corneal staining, bulbar injection, limbal injection, upper lid tarsal conjunctival abnormalities, corneal neovascularization, and corneal infiltrates. High contrast logMAR visual acuity with lenses, and lens wearing time, movement, and centration, are also presented. RESULTS: A total of 871 subjects (1,742 eyes) and 23 clinical investigators participated in the six studies, with an average completion rate of 96.4% across all studies. The mean age of the patients was 26.8 ± 6.6 years, and 86.7% of participants were female. The total number of slit-lamp examinations across the six studies was 2,456 visits by eye (1,228 visits by patient). There were no slit-lamp signs > grade 2 for any finding, with the exception of corneal staining in one study. In this study, grade 3 corneal staining was noted in one eye (0.1%) at follow-up visit 1 and four (0.6%) of all eligible dispensed eyes at follow-up visit 2, with no eyes requiring medical treatment. No adverse events were reported during any of the trials. CONCLUSION: The cosmetically tinted lenses evaluated in this meta-analysis appear to be safe when properly prescribed by an eye care professional and used in a compliant manner.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of cheap tinted contact lenses on corneal swelling and ocular surface inflammation, compared to hydrogel and silicone hydrogel contact lenses. METHODS: Forty eyes of 20 New Zealand white rabbits were randomly assigned to 4 groups. Two types of tinted contact lenses, hydrogel lenses, and silicone hydrogel lenses were each applied to 10 rabbit eyes. Corneal thickness and tear lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activity were measured at 1 and 4 days after contact lens wear, and the inflammation of ocular surface was scored at 4 days after contact lens wear. The internal surface of the cheap tinted lens was examined with a scanning electron microscope to compare the surface quality between the tinted and non-tinted area. RESULTS: Although the corneal swelling of the silicone hydrogel lens group was significantly lower than the other 3 lens groups after contact lens wear (p0.1). Tear LDH activity at 1 and 4 days after contact lens wear showed no significant difference among the 4 groups (p>0.29). The scores of ocular surface inflammation in the 2 tinted contact lens groups were greater than the hydrogel and silicone hydrogel lens groups (p=0.03). The scanning electron microscope revealed the internal surface of the tinted area in the tinted contact lens was coarse and irregular though the surface of the non-tinted area was relatively smooth. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding corneal swelling and tear LDH activity, the cheap tinted contact lenses used in Korea were not significantly different from the common hydrogel contact lenses. However, tinted contact lenses showed a greater tendency to provoke ocular surface inflammation than other lenses. The coarse and irregular surface of the tinted area in the tinted contact lens appears to play a role in provoking severe ocular surface inflammation.
