• About Us
  • Privacy
  • Contact Us

Contact Lens Update

Clinical Insights Based in Current Research

Search Our Site

  • Home
  • Browse Past Issues
  • Resource Library
  • Back to Basics
  • Useful Links
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

Conference Highlights

Refitting ‘problem’ reusable contact lens wearers with daily disposable lenses

January 9th, 2013
Mike Spyridon is a Research Associate at Visioncare Research Ltd., in the United Kingdom.

Download the poster (.pdf), which was originally shared at the Annual Meeting of The Association for Research in Vision and Opthalmology (ARVO), 2012


Michael Spyridon1, Sheila Hickson-Curran2, Graeme Young1

1Department of Clinical Research, Visioncare Research, Farnham, United Kingdom 2Vistakon, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Jacksonville, FL.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of contact lens (CL) replacement schedule and material on symptoms and signs experienced by reusable CL wearers.

Method: Part I: Data from 364 reusable CL wearers were used to estimate the prevalence of key symptoms and signs: frequent or constant dryness or irritation, uncomfortable wear (≥2 hours), ≥ grade2 of bulbar or limbal hyperaemia (0-4 scale), or ≥ grade 3 corneal staining (0-15). These patients had no evidence of ocular abnormality or disease that would contraindicate CL wear. Part II: Two-hundred and thirty-five (235)
‘problem’ patients were fitted with either etafilcon A (etA) (107) or nelfilcon A (nelA) (128) daily disposable (DD) CL and reassessed 1-2 weeks later. The ‘problem’ population included 154 patients identified as such in Part I and 81 patients with objective signs of dry eye that were recruited in separate trials.

Results: Part I: Forty-two percent (154 of 364) of the reusable CL wearers had at least one of the qualifying criteria and were classified as ‘problem’ patients. Reduced comfortable wearing time (WT) was reported by 75% (of the 154) patients, dryness by 43.5% and irritation by 10.7%. Problematic conjunctival injection or corneal staining was observed in approximately 10% of patients. Part II: Refitting with DD CLs reduced the prevalence of dryness and uncomfortable WT by 18.7% (P=0.001) and 35.3% (P=0.041), respectively, while it had no significant effect on irritation, conjunctival injection or corneal staining. No significant differences were noted in the prevalence of symptoms and signs between patients fitted with etA or nelA CLs prior to fitting with these lenses. The proportion of patients reporting dryness following refitting nelA and etA CLs, however, was 44.5% and 31.7%, respectively. The prevalence of irritation was twofold higher in nelA-fitted (21.9%) in comparison to etafA-fitted patients (11.7%, P=.05). The equivalent numbers for reduced comfortable WT were 55.4% and 37.3% (P=0.04), respectively. Approximately 11% of the nelA-fitted patients were classified with ‘problematic’ injection compared to 1.8% in the etA-fitted group (P=0.003). No significant differences were reported in the prevalence of ‘problematic’ corneal staining between the two groups.

Conclusions: Daily disposable CLs could alleviate symptoms experienced with reusable CLs, and lens performance is affected further by material.

 

Related Articles

  • January 9, 2013

    The daily disposable takeover

  • January 9, 2013

    One-day silicone hydrogel as a therapeutic lens in a severely symptomatic case of meibomian gland dysfunction

  • January 9, 2013

    Contamination of re-used daily disposable contact lenses: A Review

  • January 9, 2013

    Refitting ‘problem’ reusable contact lens wearers with daily disposable lenses

Issues

  • Specialty Rigid Lenses
  • Contact lens compliance
  • Pandemic update
  • Digital Devices and Dry Eye: A Growing Issue
  • The long and short of axial length
  • Using BCLA CLEAR with your patients
  • Helping your patients through allergy season
  • Getting the measure of meibomian glands
  • 2020: An extraordinary year
  • Scleral lens update
  • A dose of myopia
  • New news since TFOS DEWS II
  • COVID-19 Special Edition
  • Material considerations
  • Putting dry eye theory into practice
  • Getting started with Ortho-K
  • Infiltrates – an update
  • Staining
  • Myopia matters: Summarising the IMI reports
  • Lids and contact lenses
  • Myths
  • Revisiting patient compliance
  • Contact Lenses & Kids
  • Interprofessional Collaboration
  • Digital eye strain
  • New Dry Eye Technology
  • Update on Presbyopia
  • Taking stock of dry eye disease: DEWS II
  • Scleral Lenses
  • Pain and Sensation
  • Lab measurements in clinical practice
  • Control of pediatric myopia
  • Nutrition
  • Rethinking contact lens deposits
  • Extended wear
  • Daily Disposables
  • Eyelash Mites (Demodex)
  • Outsmarting bacteria with new technology
  • Youth and contact lenses
  • Sports Vision
  • Ocular effects of UV radiation from the sun
  • Eyelid Conditions
  • Makeup: Impact on ocular health
  • Myopia Control – Update 2014
  • The Growing Prevalence of Myopia
  • Cosmetic contact lenses
  • Contact lens discomfort – The essentials
  • Technology and contact lens research
  • It's A Question of Comfort
  • Contact lens materials
  • Let's talk about SICS
  • Conjunctival Controversies
  • Kids & Contact Lenses
  • One-day silicone hydrogel lenses
  • Solutions
  • Spotlight on Scleral lenses
  • Drug delivery via contact lenses
  • Ocular allergies
  • Reducing lens case contamination
  • Dry eye and meibomium gland dysfunction
  • Myopia Control
  • Presbyopia
  • Compliance and non-compliance
  • Lens care
  • Celebrating 50 years of contact lenses

Looking for another article?

Alcon coopervision Johnson&Johnson Vision Care

Newsletter Sign-Up

Sign-up for and start receiving our newsletter.

Site Map

  • Home
  • Browse Past Issues
    • Editorial
    • Feature Article
    • Clinical Insight
    • Conference Highlights
  • Resource Library
  • Back to Basics
  • Useful Links
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
© 2022 Contact Lens Update