The efficacy of cellulosic ophthalmic inserts for treatment of dry eye.

Fourteen patients with dry eye signs and symptoms were treated with a cellulosic ophthalmic insert and conventional artificial tear drops in a cross-over study. Each subject rated symptoms before the study and after each treatment period. At the conclusion of the study, subjects chose which of the two treatments they preferred. Thirteen people preferred the artificial tear drops, and more symptoms were alleviated by them. Tear breakup time was not significantly changed by either treatment. The insert was not well received due to subjective blurring of vision and ocular irritation. Other studies have shown patient preference for the insert, but this may be due to patient selection.