García-Marqués José Vicente, Macedo-de-Araújo Rute, Lopes-Ferreira Daniela, Cerviño Alejandro, García-Lázaro Santiago, González-Méijome José Manuel
Department of Optics and Optometry and Vision Sciences, University of Valencia, Burjassot, Spain.
Clinical and Experimental Optometry Research Laboratory (CEORLab) Center of Physics (Optometry), University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Clin Exp Optom. 2022 Jan;105(1):41-47. doi: 10.1080/08164622.2021.1878864. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
: Tear film assessment is essential in contact lens wearers and it can improve the success rates of the fitting.: To compare the short-term effect of two contact lenses on pre-lens tear film stability and comfort: dual-focus contact lens (MiSight) and a monofocal contact lens (Proclear 1-day).: This randomised, double-masked, crossover study was performed in twenty-eight healthy, myopic volunteers aged between 18 and 32 years (23.5 ± 4.1 years). Only one randomly chosen eye was assessed. Distance vision and refraction were evaluated at baseline. Each contact lens type (monofocal and dual-focus) was randomly fitted, always in both eyes. A visual analogue scale between 0 and 10 was used to assess general comfort, physical comfort, and visual comfort. Tear Film Surface Quality (TFSQ) index, TFSQ_area and auto Tear Break-Up Time were obtained using Medmont E-300 at baseline (naked eye condition) and 25 minutes after each contact lens insertion.: Refractive sphere and cylinder were, respectively, -1.36 ± 1.04 D (ranging from -6.00 to -0.25 D) and -0.23 ± 0.30 D (ranging from -0.75 to 0.00 D). TFSQ and TFSQ area were lower (meaning more stable tear film) at baseline when compared with both contact lens types (p < 0.025). Higher pre-lens tear instability (larger TFSQ and_TFSQ area values) was found with the dual-focus than the monofocal lens. Auto Tear Break-Up Time was higher at baseline than with each of the contact lenses, without statistically significant differences between both contact lens types. Visual analogue scales revealed statistically significant better scores in the monofocal contact lens than in dual-focus contact lens for general (0.77 ± 1.14 vs 3.12 ± 2.79), physical (0.96 ± 1.46 vs 2.19 ± 2.45) and visual comfort (1.27 ± 1.66 vs 3.92 ± 2.04).: A slight reduction in short-term pre-lens tear film stability was found in the dual-focus design in comparison with the monofocal lens, potentially contributing to the deterioration of visual performance and comfort during dual-focus contact lens wear.
泪膜评估对于佩戴隐形眼镜者至关重要，它可以提高配镜成功率。
双焦点隐形眼镜（MiSight）和单焦点隐形眼镜（Proclear 1-day）。
这项随机、双盲、交叉研究在28名年龄在18至32岁（23.5±4.1岁）的健康近视志愿者中进行。仅对一只随机选择的眼睛进行评估。在基线时评估远视力和屈光度。每种隐形眼镜类型（单焦点和双焦点）随机佩戴，始终佩戴在两只眼睛上。使用0至10的视觉模拟量表来评估总体舒适度、身体舒适度和视觉舒适度。在基线（裸眼状态）以及每次佩戴隐形眼镜25分钟后，使用Medmont E-300获得泪膜表面质量（TFSQ）指数、TFSQ面积和自动泪膜破裂时间。
屈光球镜和柱镜分别为-1.36±1.04 D（范围为-6.00至-0.25 D）和-0.23±0.30 D（范围为-0.75至0.00 D）。与两种隐形眼镜类型相比，基线时TFSQ和TFSQ面积较低（意味着泪膜更稳定）（p<0.025）。发现双焦点镜片比单焦点镜片的镜片前泪膜不稳定性更高（TFSQ和TFSQ面积值更大）。自动泪膜破裂时间在基线时高于每种隐形眼镜，两种隐形眼镜类型之间无统计学显著差异。视觉模拟量表显示，单焦点隐形眼镜在总体（0.77±1.14对3.12±2.79）、身体（0.96±1.46对2.19±2.45）和视觉舒适度（1.27±1.66对3.92±2.04）方面的得分在统计学上显著优于双焦点隐形眼镜。
与单焦点镜片相比，双焦点设计的镜片前泪膜短期稳定性略有降低，这可能导致佩戴双焦点隐形眼镜期间视觉性能和舒适度下降。
