RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) in soft contact lens (SCL) wearers on initial presentation and after using various SCL and solution combinations. METHODS: LWE was assessed in 253 habitual SCL wearers who attended a screening visit at one of three study sites. LWE was assessed using lissamine green and sodium fluorescein dyes (Korb scale); a final LWE grade was calculated as the averaged LWE grade of the two dyes. Eligible habitual wearers continued into the four study periods, during which they wore one of three SCL types (etafilcon A, galyfilcon A, or senofilcon A) while using each of four care solutions for 10 to 14 days in randomized order. Statistical analyses were performed using linear mixed models, testing for differences in LWE for subject characteristics and between three multipurpose (MPS) test solutions (BioTrue, OPTI-FREE PureMoist, RevitaLens OcuTec) compared to a hydrogen peroxide (Clear Care) control solution. RESULTS: LWE was present in 85% of habitual SCL wearers. LWE was not different for age (p = 0.28), sex (p = 0.99), race (p = 0.34), and comfort (p = 0.38) and not correlated with refractive error (r = 0.07). LWE was lower in habitual senofilcon A wearers (least-squares (LS) mean ± SE = 0.82 ± 0.19) compared to wearers of lotrafilcon B (1.34 ± 0.20; p < 0.02), comfilcon A (1.41 ± 0.21; p < 0.01), and other (1.18 ± 0.16; p < 0.03). Two hundred three participants completed all four study solutions with their assigned lens type; LWE was not different between the MPSs compared to the peroxide control solution across lens materials, except for less LWE for BioTrue (0.88 ± 0.17) versus Clear Care for participants wearing galyfilcon A (1.11 ± 0.18; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: On initial presentation, LWE was present in 85% of habitual wearers and found to be independent of age, sex, race, comfort, and refractive error but dependent on habitual SCL type. There were no clinically meaningful differences in LWE between the MPSs and hydrogen peroxide solution for the three lens types studied.
Assuntos
Soluções para Lentes de Contato/farmacologia , Lentes de Contato Hidrofílicas/efeitos adversos , Doenças Palpebrais/etiologia , Pálpebras/patologia , Adulto , Estudos Cross-Over , Método Duplo-Cego , Doenças Palpebrais/diagnóstico , Doenças Palpebrais/prevenção & controle , Pálpebras/efeitos dos fármacos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To compare clinical and subjective quality-of-life (QoL) data for teenagers wearing daily disposable contact lenses or spectacles. METHODS: This open-label study randomized subjects (aged 13 to 19 years) with no previous contact lens wear experience to nelfilcon A (DAILIES AquaComfort Plus) contact lenses or spectacles for 6 months. A full clinical workup, as well as subjective QoL measures using the Pediatric Refractive Error Profile and Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction questionnaires, was conducted at baseline and at week 4 and months 3 and 6, with an additional study visit at week 2 for subjects randomized to wear contact lenses. RESULTS: A total of 110 teenagers were enrolled in the study; 13 discontinued before study completion, 10 (17.5%) from the contact lens group and 3 (5.7%) from the spectacle group (p = 0.04). Visual acuity was good for both groups at all study visits. Biomicroscopy assessments were similar at baseline for both groups. Significant differences in Pediatric Refractive Error Profile responses were noted between vision correction groups across visits for appearance (p < 0.001), satisfaction (p < 0.001), activities (p < 0.001), peer perception (p = 0.003), and overall score (p < 0.001). For Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction, the contact lens group gave more favorable responses than the spectacle group (p = 0.02). After 6 months of wearing contact lenses, teenagers had a more positive attitude toward comfort, vision, and safety with contact lenses. No serious adverse events were reported during the study. CONCLUSIONS: The daily disposable lenses used in this study are suitable for vision correction for teenagers, offering improvements in QoL measures during the first month of wear, including appearance, satisfaction, activities, and peer perceptions, without negatively impacting vision or eye health. Teenagers were able to handle contact lenses with the same amount of confidence as spectacles.