A Pilot Study of the Effects of Swimming Goggles on Meibomian Glands.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether swimming goggle wear contributes to meibomian gland (MG) atrophy or functional change. METHODS: Subjects included minimal goggle wear experience (normal subjects) and maximal goggle wear experience (competitive swimmers). Principal outcome measures were meiboscore and percent MG area remaining percent gland area remaining [PGAR]). Clinical tests included symptoms, tear meniscus height, lipid layer thickness, fluorescein tear breakup time, corneal and conjunctival staining, lower lid margin signs, gland secretion quality, Schirmer I, and meibography. RESULTS: Forty-two age-matched, and sex-matched subjects completed the study (25 normal subjects and 17 goggle-wearing swimmers). Tear breakup time was significantly shorter in goggle wearers (P=0.016, Mann-Whitney U). Differences in meibography, symptoms, and other clinical dry eye workup parameters were not statistically significant (all P values >0.05). Regression analysis indicated that sex, tear breakup time, and meiboscore statistically impacted PGAR. CONCLUSIONS: There was no apparent difference in MG morphology and function between goggle-wearing swimmers and nongoggle-wearing control subjects in this study sample. Although swimming goggles have been documented as having adverse effects on the periorbital tissues, mechanical forces from long-term swimming goggle wear may not impact MG morphology or function. The tarsal plate likely plays a protective role for the MGs from external mechanical friction from swimming goggles.

The Efficacy of Clinical Tests to Diagnose Evaporative Dry Eye Disease Related to Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of widely available subtype clinical tests to characterize evaporative dry eye disease (EDED) related to meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) compared to normal and to validate those clinical cut points in an independent sample. METHODS: A diagnostic accuracy study (52 subjects), an investigator-masked study, was followed by a larger independent sample (364 subjects) analysis to confirm efficacy in normal and EDED subjects. All subjects were 18 years of age and older and were classified using a battery of clinical tests for dry eye that included symptoms, tear meniscus height, tear stability, ocular staining, evaporative-specific tests, and the Schirmer I test. RESULTS: Normal (nondry eye; n = 26) and EDED (n = 26) subjects completed the efficacy study. The global tests of tear breakup time, staining, and symptoms all produced AUCs ≥ 0.70, representing acceptable discrimination. EDED-specific tests of eyelid marginal signs, gland secretion quality, and gland loss did not demonstrate acceptable test efficacy or differences between normal and EDED subjects. In a larger, independent sample of normal and EDED subjects, gland secretion quality and eyelid marginal score achieved acceptable diagnostic levels: AUCs of 0.789 (CI: 0.734-0.844) and 0.729 (CI: 0.648-0.810), respectively, but not lipid interferometry grade or lower eyelid gland dropout estimated using meiboscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Meibomian gland secretion quality is an efficient and useful functional indicator in EDED and should be incorporated into core outcome sets for this dry eye subtype.

Validation of the Modified Schein Dry Eye Symptom Questionnaire and Comparison With the Ocular Surface Disease Index.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the validity and diagnostic efficacy of a modified Schein dry eye questionnaire and compared it to the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI). METHODS: The original Schein survey was modified to allow numerical scoring on a 0 to 24 scale and evaluated in prospective studies in normal and dry eye subjects. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for test efficacy in aqueous deficient dry eye (ADDE) and evaporative dry eye (EDE) related to meibomian gland dysfunction was determined. RESULTS: Dry eye subtype, age and gender were statistically significant in explaining variation in modified Schein scores (n = 377; general linear model; all P values < 0.006) whereas for Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) only age and gender were significant, but not dry eye subtype. The modified Schein ROC curve had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.693 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.635-0.753), with cutpoint of 7.5 (sensitivity of 0.75, specificity of 0.55). Similarly, the OSDI had an AUC of 0.685 (95% CI, 0.610-0.760), at a cutpoint of 10.4 (sensitivity of 0.75, specificity of 0.55). Modified Schein and OSDI correlated well (Pearson r = 0.81; P < 0.001). Symptom change for the modified Schein with artificial tear treatment was significant in EDE subjects (Dunnet's tests, P value < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The modified Schein questionnaire is rapid to administer and score and compares well with the OSDI for test efficacy. Moreover, it differentiates normals from ADDE and EDE subtypes and is responsive to dry eye treatment. These attributes make the modified Schein survey an attractive dry eye symptom characterization instrument. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The modified Schein symptom survey, validated against clinical diagnosis and an existing survey, provides a new, efficacious diagnostic and treatment monitoring instrument in dry eye disease.

Efficacy of the Fluorescein Tear Breakup Time Test in Dry Eye.

PURPOSE: To examine the effects of volume and method on fluorescein tear breakup time (TBUT) values and to evaluate test efficacy in an independent sample free of selection bias. METHODS: Subjects were assessed using a battery of dry eye tests (DETs). Efficacy study: Subjects were randomized to the DET, standard strip, and liquid NaFl on separate days. A masked examiner measured TBUTs from video recordings. Verification study: Subjects were investigated for efficacy using volumes of 5.0 and 2.0 µL mL of NaFl for TBUT. RESULTS: Efficacy study: 46 subjects completed the study. Log-transformed TBUTs were significantly different, normal subjects versus dry subjects, for all 3 methods (all P values < 0.001). Area under the curves (AUCs), cut-points, sensitivity, and specificity were 1) DET: 0.873, 4.4 seconds, 0.97, and 0.67, respectively; 2) 2.0 mL: 0.901, 3.22 seconds, 0.90, and 0.87, respectively; and 3) standard strip: 0.912, 3.42 seconds, 0.97, and 0.80, respectively. Verification study: Data splitting analysis for the 2.0 µL data (n = 174 dry subjects and 97 normal subjects) generated an AUC of 0.917 and a cut-point of 6.05 seconds for a sensitivity of 0.87 and a specificity of 0.81. The 5.0 µL sample yielded an AUC of 0.940, with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.92 and 0.83, respectively, at a cut-point of 5.5 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: Little difference in TBUT was found using the 3 clinical methods with video recordings. Analysis using liquid NaFl suggests that the TBUT test has excellent diagnostic accuracy and that a cut-point of 5.3 to 6.0 seconds is the optimum to differentiate normals from persons with dry eye.