April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Selecting a Sensory Panel to Judge Contact Lens Discomfort
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • William Ngo
    Centre for Contact Lens Research, Waterloo, ON, Canada
    University of Waterloo and Vision Science, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • Yunwei Feng
    University of Waterloo and Vision Science, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • Nancy J Keir
    CooperVision, Pleasanton, CA
  • Trefford L Simpson
    University of Waterloo and Vision Science, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships William Ngo, Alcon (F); Yunwei Feng, None; Nancy Keir, CooperVision (E); Trefford Simpson, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 4666. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      William Ngo, Yunwei Feng, Nancy J Keir, Trefford L Simpson; Selecting a Sensory Panel to Judge Contact Lens Discomfort. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):4666.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: To determine individuals from a population of contact lens wearers who are able to discriminate contact lens discomfort well.

Methods: 44 adapted soft lens wearers were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, study. Corneal mechanical sensitivity threshold (CMST) was determined for each participant on one randomly determined eye prior to inserting a randomly determined contact lens (lens A, B, or C) in the contralateral eye. A customized Belmonte pneumatic esthesiometer was used to induce discomfort in the non-lens wearing eye by administering a controlled flow of air to the cornea. The participants were asked to match the magnitude of discomfort to the contact lens wearing eye by adjusting a potentiometer that controlled the flow rate of the air. The participants were also asked to give a subjective score (0 to 100) to rate the discomfort of the lens. This procedure was repeated for the other two lenses on two separate days. CMST variance was calculated and the sample was split into two equal sized groups: the participants in the lower CMST variance half were defined as the sensory panel group, and participants in the higher CMST variance half were defined as the control group. McNemar’s test was used to quantify the significance of the ordinal rank of the lenses based on subjective discomfort scores. The three lens comparisons tested were A vs. B, A vs. C, and B vs. C.

Results: The mean CMST variance of the sensory panel group (58.43±53.92(ml/min)2, 0.00-175.75(ml/min)2) was significantly lower (p<0.05) than the control group (688.80±554.83(ml/min)2, 196.33-2325.00(ml/min)2). Based on ordinal ranking derived from the subjective discomfort ratings, the sensory panel group was able to significantly discriminate between A vs. B and A vs. C (both p≤0.05), but not B vs. C (p=NS). The control group was only able to discriminate between A vs. C (p=0.05).

Conclusions: Low CMST variance is one possible criterion that could be used to find individuals who are good contact lens discriminators. Future work will include refining and exploring different strategies to define a sensory panel, and determine how different the two groups will perform when wearing lenses throughout the day. A limitation of this study is that it uses mechanical stimuli to match lens discomfort, which may not be representative of true lens discomfort.

Keywords: 477 contact lens • 479 cornea: clinical science  

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.