April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Investigation of diurnal blink patterns using a continuous blink tracking device in soft contact lens wearers
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Colleen Heckley
    R & D, Ora, Inc, Andover, MA
  • John David Rodriguez
    R & D, Ora, Inc, Andover, MA
  • Endri Angjeli
    R & D, Ora, Inc, Andover, MA
  • Keith Jeffrey Lane
    R & D, Ora, Inc, Andover, MA
  • George W Ousler
    Ora, Inc, Andover, MA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Colleen Heckley, Ora, Inc. (E); John Rodriguez, Ora, Inc. (E); Endri Angjeli, Ora, Inc. (E); Keith Lane, Ora, Inc. (E); George Ousler, Ora, Inc. (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 6062. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Colleen Heckley, John David Rodriguez, Endri Angjeli, Keith Jeffrey Lane, George W Ousler; Investigation of diurnal blink patterns using a continuous blink tracking device in soft contact lens wearers. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):6062.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: To investigate diurnal blink patterns in contact lens wearers in various environmental conditions.

Methods: A wearable continuous blink tracking telemetric device was used to record electromyograms corresponding to activity of the orbicularis oculi muscle. Four contact lens wearers were tracked over a period of six days (6-14 hours per day). The first four days (Visits 1-4) consisted of continuous blink recording while wearing each of the following: 1) spectacles; 2) habitual lenses; 3) soft extended wear lens A; and 4) soft extended wear lens B. On the final two days (Visits 5 and 6), the effect of exposure to the controlled adverse environment (CAESM) wearing lenses A and B at separate visits was investigated. Blink rate, as measured by interblink interval (IBI), was the primary outcome variable.

Results: Mean diurnal IBI was 3.671 (SD 3.94) seconds during lens wear vs 5.095 (SD 5.573) seconds during spectacle wear (p<0.0001). Under non-stressed conditions, there was no difference (p=0.54) in diurnal IBI wearing lens A (IBI: 3.941, SD 4.005 seconds) versus lens B (IBI: 3.932, SD 4.061 seconds). Mean diurnal IBI for lens B (3.62, SD 1.06) decreased significantly (p=0.028) during CAESM challenge. Mean symptom score during the CAESM was 1.02 on a scale of 0 to 4 (0 being none and 4 being worst discomfort) for lens B vs 0.408 for lens A (p=0.073). For both lenses, IBI and symptoms were significantly correlated during CAESM exposure (Spearman coefficients: lens A, -0.3378, p = 0.0037; lens B: -0.5055, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Mean diurnal IBI during spectacle wear was significantly longer than when wearing contact lenses. Mean diurnal IBI during the CAESM was significantly shorter with lens B compared to lens A. This was associated with higher discomfort scores, and a significant correlation between IBI and symptoms. This continuous blink tracking device provides a sensitive method for high-throughput screening of different lens materials and designs by monitoring diurnal blink patterns, comfort, and compensatory responses during a challenge in adverse environmental conditions.

Keywords: 486 cornea: tears/tear film/dry eye • 477 contact lens • 468 clinical research methodology  

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.