title: Effect of lens and solution choice on the comfort of contact lens wearers.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  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.
  
  
  METHODS
  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.
  
  
  RESULTS
  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.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  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.
authors.affiliation: Brien Holden Vision Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia. d.tilia@brienholdenvision.org
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Tilia
authors.forename: Percy
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Lazon de la Jara
authors.forename: Nikki
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Peng
authors.forename: Eric B
authors.initials: EB
authors.lastname: Papas
authors.forename: Brien A
authors.initials: BA
authors.lastname: Holden
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D018639:Contact Lens Solutions / Q000494:pharmacology*; D003261:Contact Lenses; D018592:Cross-Over Studies; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012030:Refractive Errors / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult
chemical_list: D018639:Contact Lens Solutions