Alex Muntz1, Sanjay Marasini1, Michael T M Wang1, Jennifer P Craig2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, New Zealand National Eye Centre, The University of Auckland, New Zealand. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, New Zealand National Eye Centre, The University of Auckland, New Zealand. Electronic address: jp.craig@auckland.ac.nz.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the prophylactic benefits of lipid-based and non-lipid-based artificial tear lubricants, in dry eye disease, after adverse environmental exposure. METHODS:Twenty-eight participants with dry eye disease were recruited in a prospective, double-masked, randomised crossover trial. On separate days, participants were randomised to receive a single application of a lipid-containing tear supplement (Systane Complete) to one eye, and a non-lipid containing eye drop (Systane Ultra) to the contralateral eye. Participants were then exposed to a previously validated simulated adverse environment. Symptoms, non-invasive tear film breakup time, lipid layer grade, and tear meniscus height were assessed at three time points; baseline, following eye drop instillation, and after exposure to the adverse environment. RESULTS: Both treatments effected improvements in symptoms and non-invasive tear film stability following instillation (all p < 0.05), although an improvement in lipid layer quality was limited to the lipid-containing nano-emulsion tear supplement (p = 0.003). Although protective effects were conferred by both treatments following exposure to the simulated adverse environment, more favourable symptomology scores, non-invasive tear film stability, and lipid layer quality were observed in the lipid-containing tear supplement group (all p < 0.05). No significant changes were observed in tear meniscus height in both treatment groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both the lipid and non-lipid-based artificial tear supplement demonstrated prophylactic benefits in a simulated adverse environment. However, the ability to preserve tear film quality and reduce dry eye symptomology was greater with the lipid-containing eye drop. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000361101.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the prophylactic benefits of lipid-based and non-lipid-based artificial tear lubricants, in dry eye disease, after adverse environmental exposure. METHODS: Twenty-eight participants with dry eye disease were recruited in a prospective, double-masked, randomised crossover trial. On separate days, participants were randomised to receive a single application of a lipid-containing tear supplement (Systane Complete) to one eye, and a non-lipid containing eye drop (Systane Ultra) to the contralateral eye. Participants were then exposed to a previously validated simulated adverse environment. Symptoms, non-invasive tear film breakup time, lipid layer grade, and tear meniscus height were assessed at three time points; baseline, following eye drop instillation, and after exposure to the adverse environment. RESULTS: Both treatments effected improvements in symptoms and non-invasive tear film stability following instillation (all p < 0.05), although an improvement in lipid layer quality was limited to the lipid-containing nano-emulsion tear supplement (p = 0.003). Although protective effects were conferred by both treatments following exposure to the simulated adverse environment, more favourable symptomology scores, non-invasive tear film stability, and lipid layer quality were observed in the lipid-containing tear supplement group (all p < 0.05). No significant changes were observed in tear meniscus height in both treatment groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both the lipid and non-lipid-based artificial tear supplement demonstrated prophylactic benefits in a simulated adverse environment. However, the ability to preserve tear film quality and reduce dry eye symptomology was greater with the lipid-containing eye drop. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000361101.