Subjective comfort and physiology with modern contact lens care products

Academic Article

Abstract

  • © Copyright 2016 American Academy of Optometry. Purpose. To compare subjective comfort and ocular physiology with three multipurpose solutions (MPSs) to that of a peroxide-based system with three different soft contact lens materials. Methods. Habitual soft contact lens wearers (n = 236) were enrolled at three sites and completed a washout period with no contact lens solution for ≥4 days. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three lens types: etafilcon A, galyfilcon A, or senofilcon A. A new lens of the assigned type was worn for 10 to 14 days each while using one of four care solutions, in random order (A - polyaminopropyl biguanide + polyquaternium, B - POLYQUAD + Aldox, C - alexidine + polyquaternium-1, and D - hydrogen peroxide) with a washout period (≥4 days) between each solution. After each care solution, biomicroscopy was performed and subjective comfort was assessed using the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE) questionnaire and other instruments including comfortable wear time (CWT). Linear mixed models were used for analysis. Comfort and biomicroscopy signs with each MPS were compared to that of the peroxide solution. Results. Subjective CLUE Comfort score across all lens types with each MPS was not significantly different than with the peroxide solution (p = 0.98). There were no differences in CWT between each MPS and the peroxide solution for any lens type (range of differences: -0.8 to 0.8 h; all p ≥ 0.13). Six MPS/material combinations had no clinically meaningful change in corneal staining versus peroxide (<0.5 units); three combinations could increase staining by up to 0.57 units. Staining was
  • Published In

    Digital Object Identifier (doi)

    Author List

  • Berntsen DA; Hickson-Curran SB; Jones LW; Mathew JH; Maldonado-Codina C; Morgan PB; Schulze MM; Nichols JJ; Cox SM; Bickle KM
  • Start Page

  • 809
  • End Page

  • 819
  • Volume

  • 93
  • Issue

  • 8