Wu Yvonne T, Teng Yuu Juan, Nicholas Mary, Harmis Najat, Zhu Hua, Willcox Mark D P, Stapleton Fiona
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Optom Vis Sci. 2011 Oct;88(10):E1180-7. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182282f28.
Lens case contamination is a risk factor for microbial keratitis. The effectiveness of manufacturers' lens case cleaning guidelines in limiting microbial contamination has not been evaluated in vivo. This study compared the effectiveness of manufacturers' guidelines and an alternative cleaning regimen.
A randomized cross-over clinical trial with two phases (n = 40) was performed. Participants used the lens types of their choice in conjunction with the provided multipurpose solution (containing polyhexamethylene biguanide) for daily wear. In the manufacturers' guideline phase, cases were rinsed with multipurpose solution and air dried. In the alternative regimen phase, cases were rubbed, rinsed with solution, tissue wiped, and air-dried face down. The duration of each phase was 1 month. Lens cases were collected at the end of each phase for microbiological investigation. The levels of microbial contamination were compared, and compliance to both regimens was assessed.
The case contamination rate was 82% (32/39) in the manufacturers' guideline group, compared with 72% (28/39) in the alternative regimen group. There were significantly fewer (p = 0.004) colony forming units (CFU) of bacteria from cases used by following the alternative regimen (CFU range of 0 to 10, and median of 12 CFU per well) compared with that of the manufacturer's guidelines (CFU range of 0 to 10, and median of 28 CFU per well). The compliance level between both guidelines was not significantly different (p > 0.05).
The alternative guidelines are more effective in eliminating microbial contamination from lens cases than that of the current manufacturer's guideline. Simply incorporating rubbing and tissue-wiping steps in daily case hygiene reduces viable organism contamination.
镜盒污染是微生物性角膜炎的一个危险因素。制造商的镜盒清洁指南在限制微生物污染方面的有效性尚未在体内进行评估。本研究比较了制造商指南和一种替代清洁方案的有效性。
进行了一项分为两个阶段的随机交叉临床试验(n = 40)。参与者使用他们选择的镜片类型,并结合提供的多功能护理液(含聚六亚甲基双胍)进行日常佩戴。在制造商指南阶段,镜盒用多功能护理液冲洗并风干。在替代方案阶段,镜盒进行揉搓、用护理液冲洗、用纸巾擦拭并面朝下风干。每个阶段持续1个月。在每个阶段结束时收集镜盒进行微生物学调查。比较微生物污染水平,并评估对两种方案的依从性。
制造商指南组的镜盒污染率为82%(32/39),而替代方案组为72%(28/39)。与遵循制造商指南的镜盒相比,遵循替代方案的镜盒中细菌的菌落形成单位(CFU)明显更少(p = 0.004)(CFU范围为0至10,每孔中位数为12 CFU)(制造商指南组CFU范围为0至10,每孔中位数为28 CFU)。两种指南之间的依从性水平无显著差异(p > 0.05)。
替代指南在消除镜盒中的微生物污染方面比当前制造商的指南更有效。在日常镜盒卫生中简单地加入揉搓和纸巾擦拭步骤可减少活菌污染。