The influence of lens conditioning on signs and symptoms with new hydrogel contact lenses

Purpose: To investigate the appearance of limbal and bulbar hyperaemia in normal eyes, their relationship and the inter-observer agreement of clinical grading. Methods: The right eyes of 120 healthy, non-contact lens-wearing subjects (m = 57, f = 63, median age = 45 years, range 18-77 years) were examined by two trained observers. Limbal and bulbar hyperaemia were scored using the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit (CCLRU) redness grading scales interpolated into 0.1 increments. Redness of four quadrants, and overall, were assessed, and quadrant-average redness was calculated. Inter-observer agreement was assessed at the start and end of the study (20 subjects each). Results: For limbal redness, the overall (1.62 ± 0.46) (mean units ± S.D.) was not significantly different from the quadrant-average (1.61 ± 0.40) score. For bulbar redness, the overall (2.02 ± 0.49) was higher than the quadrant-average (1.82 ± 0.39) score (p < 0.0001). Significant correlations were found between bulbar and limbal quadrants (Pearson: r ‡ 0.43, p < 0.0001). Significant differences in redness were found between quadrants (p < 0.0001), with nasal and temporal redder than superior and inferior quadrants. Small effects of age and gender were found for limbal redness. The inter-observer 95% limits of agreement were similar at the start and end of the study. They were larger for overall (0.57) compared with quadrant-average (0.28) redness. Conclusions: For similar populations, a limbal redness above 2.5 or a bulbar redness above 2.6 (quadrant-average) or 3.0 (overall) may be considered abnormal. Limbal and bulbar redness were correlated. Quadrant-average scores are recommended instead of overall scores, as inter-observer agreement was better.

show abstract

“…, 2003; Stapleton et al. , 2003; Coles et al. , 2004) but not for healthy, non‐contact‐lens‐wearing normal subjects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…, 2003; Stapleton et al. , 2003; Coles et al. , 2004) and normal levels of some appearances evaluated by the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit (CCLRU) grading scale are published (Dundas et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limbal and Bulbar Hyperaemia in Normal Eyes

Pult

Murphy

Purslow

et al. 2008

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 Contact lenses preconditioned with CMC before insertion produces less corneal staining and limbal and conjunctival redness and are more comfortable to wear than are nonconditioned lenses. 7 Although the precise role of CMC in the protective effect observed is not known, these findings suggest that CMC may be involved in the repair of the ocular surface.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Carboxymethylcellulose Binds to Human Corneal Epithelial Cells and Is a Modulator of Corneal Epithelial Wound Healing

Garrett

Simmons

et al. 2007

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The role of contact lens care systems in conditioning lens surfaces to enhance lens surface wetting, has recently earned renewed interest and may prove an important contributing factor in sustained contact lens comfort . Although it is clear that lens wettability onset latency, drying duration, peak latency and maximum speed are very useful measurements, a variety of other factors are also likely to contribute to contact lens wearer comfort after storage in care solutions, such as lens lubricity, deposit accumulation and contact lens modulus …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%