BACKGROUND: Dry eye is not only incapacitating to the patient but its treatment is also challenging. It would undoubtedly be more amenable to therapy if it could be detected at an early stage and its prognosis be recorded accurately and sensitively. In the past few years 'dry eye' and its sequelae have become the focus of attention of ophthalmologists worldwide. Whereas there has been a tremendous contribution by the pharmaceutical industry towards its treatment, its diagnostic and prognostic tests, such as Schirmer's test and tear film break-up time (BUT), appear primitive. With this in mind, we have designed a 'xerosis meter'--an electronic device that can detect and grade tissue dryness. METHODS: This device is based on the principle that the electrical conductivity of any tissue is directly proportional to its wetness. The sensitivity of this instrument was compared with Schirmer's test and BUT. RESULT AND CONCLUSION: The xerosis meter readings in normal eyes (control group) and dry eyes (test group) were compared statistically using the unpaired t-test (p<0.001). The sensitivity of the xerosis meter (86.11%) was much higher than that of Schirmer's test (80.55%) and BUT (66.66%).
BACKGROUND:Dry eye is not only incapacitating to the patient but its treatment is also challenging. It would undoubtedly be more amenable to therapy if it could be detected at an early stage and its prognosis be recorded accurately and sensitively. In the past few years 'dry eye' and its sequelae have become the focus of attention of ophthalmologists worldwide. Whereas there has been a tremendous contribution by the pharmaceutical industry towards its treatment, its diagnostic and prognostic tests, such as Schirmer's test and tear film break-up time (BUT), appear primitive. With this in mind, we have designed a 'xerosis meter'--an electronic device that can detect and grade tissue dryness. METHODS: This device is based on the principle that the electrical conductivity of any tissue is directly proportional to its wetness. The sensitivity of this instrument was compared with Schirmer's test and BUT. RESULT AND CONCLUSION: The xerosis meter readings in normal eyes (control group) and dry eyes (test group) were compared statistically using the unpaired t-test (p<0.001). The sensitivity of the xerosis meter (86.11%) was much higher than that of Schirmer's test (80.55%) and BUT (66.66%).