Clinical characterisation of contact lens discomfort progression.

Cont Lens Anterior Eye

Instituto de Oftalmobiología Aplicada (IOBA), University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain; Departamento de Física Teórica, Atómica y Óptica, Facultad de Ciencias, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain; Biomedical Research Networking Center in Bioengineering, Biomaterials and Nanomedicine (CIBER-BBN), Valladolid, Spain.

Published: February 2024

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the subjective and objective differences among the steps of the contact lens discomfort (CLD) progression classification established by the Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society (TFOS) using questionnaires and clinical signs, and to propose a simplified classification.

Methods: Contact lens (CL) wearers were evaluated in a single visit. The Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire (CLDEQ)-8, the Contact Lens Discomfort Index, and Visual Analog Scales for discomfort and dryness were administered. The non-invasive break-up time, the tear film lipid layer thickness, conjunctival hyperaemia and papillae, lid-parallel conjunctival folds, the fluorescein tear film break-up time, corneal and conjunctival staining, lid wiper epitheliopathy, and the Schirmer test were assessed. Sign and symptom scores were compared among TFOS CLD progression steps using analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis H test. Steps 1 and 2 (reduced comfort), and steps 3 and 4 (reduced wearing time) of the TFOS classification were combined to obtain a simplified classification, and the same comparison was performed. A p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: One hundred-fifty CL wearers (97 women and 53 men) aged 34.4 ± 12.6 years were included. In the TFOS classification, there were significant differences between step 0 (no CLD) and the rest of the severity steps for the scores obtained in all questionnaires (p ≤ 0.015). All steps were differentiated (p ≤ 0.032) based on the simplified classification for all questionnaires, except steps 1 and 2 for the CLDEQ-8 and dryness VAS (p = 0.089 and p = 0.051, respectively). There were no differences (all p ≥ 0.06) between the sign scores among the steps of either classification.

Conclusion: CLD management is encouraged from its first appearance. Simplifying the phases of CLD severity may allow a more accurate classification and a better awareness of the problem by clinicians and CL wearers by using more straightforward simple messages.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2023.102096DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

contact lens
20
lens discomfort
12
tear film
12
steps
8
cld progression
8
break-up time
8
steps reduced
8
tfos classification
8
simplified classification
8
classification
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!