Tilia Daniel, Lazon de la Jara Percy, Peng Nikki, Papas Eric B, Holden Brien A
Brien Holden Vision Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.
Optom Vis Sci. 2013 May;90(5):411-8. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31828e92d4.
To determine if the ocular comfort of symptomatic contact lens (CL) wearers can be substantially influenced by choosing a better or worse performing CL-lens care product (LCP) combination.
Twenty-four symptomatic and 13 nonsymptomatic CL wearers were enrolled into a prospective, crossover, randomized clinical trial. Two CL-LCP combinations were chosen from studies previously conducted at the Brien Holden Vision Institute that were found to provide the best (galyfilcon A/polyhexanide, combination 1) and worst performance (balafilcon A/polyquaternium-1 and myristamidopropyl dimethylamine + TearGlyde, combination 2) in terms of end-of-day comfort. Subjects were not informed whether they were categorized as symptomatic or nonsymptomatic nor were they aware of the rankings of each CL-LCP combination. Subjects were randomly allocated to one of the CL-LCP combinations for 8 days on a daily wear basis. Contact lens fitting was assessed after insertion from the packaging solution. Take-home questionnaires assessing ocular comfort and dryness (1 to 10 numeric rating scale) were completed on insertion and after 2 and 8 hours of wear on days 2, 4, and 6. Ocular symptoms were assessed on days 2, 4, and 6 after 8 hours of wear. A 48-hour washout period during which CLs were not worn was applied, with the procedure repeated using the second combination.
In symptomatic subjects, combination 1 was rated significantly better than combination 2 after 8 hours of wear for ocular comfort (7.7 ± 1.3 vs. 7.1 ± 1.5, p = 0.01) and ocular dryness (7.5 ± 1.6 vs. 7.0 ± 1.6, p = 0.045), with less frequent symptoms of ocular dryness (p < 0.01) and lens awareness (p < 0.01) reported. No significant differences were found in nonsymptomatic subjects.
Ocular comfort and symptoms in symptomatic CL wearers can be perceptibly improved by switching to an alternative CL-LCP combination. This finding provides justification for the efforts of both eye care practitioners and researchers to improve the comfort of CL wearers.
确定选择性能较好或较差的隐形眼镜护理产品（LCP）组合，是否会对有症状的隐形眼镜佩戴者的眼部舒适度产生显著影响。
24名有症状的隐形眼镜佩戴者和13名无症状的隐形眼镜佩戴者被纳入一项前瞻性、交叉、随机临床试验。从Brien Holden视觉研究所之前进行的研究中选择了两种隐形眼镜-LCP组合，发现它们在一天结束时的舒适度方面表现最佳（加泪康A/聚己缩胍，组合1）和最差（百超顺A/聚季铵盐-1和肉豆蔻酰胺丙基二甲基胺+泪液舒缓因子，组合2）。受试者未被告知自己是有症状还是无症状，也不知道每种隐形眼镜-LCP组合的排名。受试者被随机分配到其中一种隐形眼镜-LCP组合，每天佩戴8天。从包装溶液中取出隐形眼镜后评估其佩戴情况。在第2、4和6天佩戴2小时和8小时后以及佩戴后，完成带回家的评估眼部舒适度和干燥度的问卷（1至10数字评分量表）。在第2、4和6天佩戴8小时后评估眼部症状。应用48小时的洗脱期，在此期间不佩戴隐形眼镜，然后使用第二种组合重复该过程。
在有症状的受试者中，佩戴8小时后，组合1在眼部舒适度（7.7±1.3对7.1±1.5，p = 0.01）和眼部干燥度（7.5±1.6对7.0±1.6，p = 0.045）方面的评分明显高于组合2，报告的眼部干燥症状（p < 0.01）和镜片感知症状（p < 0.01）频率较低。在无症状的受试者中未发现显著差异。
有症状的隐形眼镜佩戴者通过改用另一种隐形眼镜-LCP组合，眼部舒适度和症状可得到明显改善。这一发现为眼科护理从业者和研究人员努力提高隐形眼镜佩戴者的舒适度提供了依据。
