RESUMO
ABSTRACT Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether early-stage intraocular pressure can be modulated using a thermal face mask. Methods: In this prospective clinical study, healthy participants were randomized on a 1:1:1 allocation ratio to three mask groups: hypothermic (G1), normothermic (G2), and hyperthermic (G3). After randomization, 108 eyes from 108 participants were submitted to clinical evaluations, including measurement of initial intraocular pressure (T1). The thermal mask was then applied for 10 minutes, followed by a second evaluation of intraocular pressure (T2) and assessment of any side effects. Results: The hypothermic group (G1) showed a significant reduction in mean intraocular pressure between T1 (16.97 ± 2.59 mmHg) and T2 (14.97 ± 2.44 mmHg) (p<0.001). G2 showed no significant pressure difference between T1 (16.50 ± 2.55 mmHg) and T2 (17.00 ± 2.29 mmHg) (p=0.054). G3 showed a significant increase in pressure from T1 (16.53 ± 2.69 mmHg) to T2 (18.58 ± 2.95 mmHg) (p<0.001). At T1, there was no difference between the three study groups (p=0.823), but at T2, the mean values of G3 were significantly higher than those of G1 and G2 (p<0.00). Conclusion: Temperature was shown to significantly modify intraocular pressure. Thermal masks allow the application of temperature in a controlled, reproducible manner. Further studies are needed to assess the duration of these effects and whether they are reproducible in patients with pathologies that affect intraocular pressure.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine whether early-stage intraocular pressure can be modulated using a thermal face mask. METHODS: In this prospective clinical study, healthy participants were randomized on a 1:1:1 allocation ratio to three mask groups: hypothermic (G1), normothermic (G2), and hyperthermic (G3). After randomization, 108 eyes from 108 participants were submitted to clinical evaluations, including measurement of initial intraocular pressure (T1). The thermal mask was then applied for 10 minutes, followed by a second evaluation of intraocular pressure (T2) and assessment of any side effects. RESULTS: The hypothermic group (G1) showed a significant reduction in mean intraocular pressure between T1 (16.97 ± 2.59 mmHg) and T2 (14.97 ± 2.44 mmHg) (p<0.001). G2 showed no significant pressure difference between T1 (16.50 ± 2.55 mmHg) and T2 (17.00 ± 2.29 mmHg) (p=0.054). G3 showed a significant increase in pressure from T1 (16.53 ± 2.69 mmHg) to T2 (18.58 ± 2.95 mmHg) (p<0.001). At T1, there was no difference between the three study groups (p=0.823), but at T2, the mean values of G3 were significantly higher than those of G1 and G2 (p<0.00). CONCLUSION: Temperature was shown to significantly modify intraocular pressure. Thermal masks allow the application of temperature in a controlled, reproducible manner. Further studies are needed to assess the duration of these effects and whether they are reproducible in patients with pathologies that affect intraocular pressure.