May 2003
Volume 44, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2003
Suprathreshold Scaling of Limbal Mechanical Stimuli
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • T.L. Simpson
    School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • D. Fonn
    School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • J. Wang
    School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
  • S. Hickson-Curran
    Vistakon, Division of Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Jacksonville, FL, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  T.L. Simpson, None; D. Fonn, None; J. Wang, None; S. Hickson-Curran, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Johnson & Johnson Vision Care
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2003, Vol.44, 3709. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      T.L. Simpson, D. Fonn, J. Wang, S. Hickson-Curran; Suprathreshold Scaling of Limbal Mechanical Stimuli . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):3709.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: To examine suprathreshold response to mechanical stimulation of the limbus. Methods: Thirty nine subjects rated the discomfort, using magnitude estimation (with maximum set at 100), induced by systematically administered mechanical stimuli present at the limbus. The stimuli were specific pressures applied in random order, using a Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer (using thread lengths of 10 to 50 mm in 10mm increments) at the point in the limbal area where each subject’s threshold was 50mm. Each subject’s transducer function (pressure vs magnitude) was fit with a power function, as was the group’s mean transducer function. Results: As was anticipated based on Steven’s Power Law, the data were well described by power functions (r mean = 0.93). The mean exponent (+/- se) of the individual power functions was 0.33 +/-0.04 and the exponent of the mean power function was 0.30 +/- 0.01. A one sample t-test showed that this was statistically lower than the exponent of the power function for central cornea (t=-15.7, p=0.000) reported by Millodot (1968, J Psychonomic Soc. 12, 401-402). Conclusions: The data suggest that suprathreshold increments of mechanical limbal stimulation produces lower increments in discomfort (lower exponents) in comparison to the corneal apex. Therefore, both threshold and suprathreshold limbal stimulation is less effective compared to stimulation of the corneal apex.

Keywords: innervation: sensation • contact lens • cornea: tears/tear film/dry eye 

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.