PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of new moist cool air device (MCAD) for ocular symptoms, tear film stability and ocular surface status in office workers with dry eye disease (DED). METHODS: In this prospective single-centre clinical trial, 40 eyes of 20 patients with DED were recruited and randomly divided into two groups (group with MCAD exposure and group without MCAD). All subjects are visual display terminals (VDTs) workers spending at least 4 h/day in front of VDTs. Patients using MCAD underwent moist air applications for 4 h/day for a total of five working weekdays during VDT works at their offices. The other group of patients performed their VDT work without moist cool air device exposure. The change in symptoms of ocular surface (OS) dryness, fatigue and discomfort was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Changes in visual function, tear functions and ocular surface status were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the functional visual acuity (FVA) test, blink rate, BUT measurements, strip meniscometry (SM), tear evaporation rate, fluorescein staining and rose bengal staining scores. Tear film lipid layer interferometry was also performed to assess the status of the lipid layer over the tear film. In addition, adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: In group with MCAD, symptoms of OS dryness during VDTs work, and FVA and BUT were significantly improved. SM and tear evaporation rate were significantly improved. There were no statistically significant differences on lipid layer stability and corneal staining scores in both groups. Blink rate was significantly increased in group without MCAD. No adverse events were reported during this trial. CONCLUSION:Moist cool air device use provided symptomatic relief of ocular dryness and improvement on tear stability in office workers with DED. This new device seems to be a safe and promising alternative in the treatment of DED.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of new moist cool air device (MCAD) for ocular symptoms, tear film stability and ocular surface status in office workers with dry eye disease (DED). METHODS: In this prospective single-centre clinical trial, 40 eyes of 20 patients with DED were recruited and randomly divided into two groups (group with MCAD exposure and group without MCAD). All subjects are visual display terminals (VDTs) workers spending at least 4 h/day in front of VDTs. Patients using MCAD underwent moist air applications for 4 h/day for a total of five working weekdays during VDT works at their offices. The other group of patients performed their VDT work without moist cool air device exposure. The change in symptoms of ocular surface (OS) dryness, fatigue and discomfort was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Changes in visual function, tear functions and ocular surface status were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the functional visual acuity (FVA) test, blink rate, BUT measurements, strip meniscometry (SM), tear evaporation rate, fluorescein staining and rose bengal staining scores. Tear film lipid layer interferometry was also performed to assess the status of the lipid layer over the tear film. In addition, adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: In group with MCAD, symptoms of OS dryness during VDTs work, and FVA and BUT were significantly improved. SM and tear evaporation rate were significantly improved. There were no statistically significant differences on lipid layer stability and corneal staining scores in both groups. Blink rate was significantly increased in group without MCAD. No adverse events were reported during this trial. CONCLUSION: Moist cool air device use provided symptomatic relief of ocular dryness and improvement on tear stability in office workers with DED. This new device seems to be a safe and promising alternative in the treatment of DED.
Authors: Mark D P Willcox; Pablo Argüeso; Georgi A Georgiev; Juha M Holopainen; Gordon W Laurie; Tom J Millar; Eric B Papas; Jannick P Rolland; Tannin A Schmidt; Ulrike Stahl; Tatiana Suarez; Lakshman N Subbaraman; Omür Ö Uçakhan; Lyndon Jones Journal: Ocul Surf Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 5.033