September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Prospective, randomized trial of the two mucin secretogogues for the treatment of dry eye in office workers.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jun Shimazaki
    Ophthalmology, Tokyo Dental College, Ichikawa, Chiba, Japan
  • Seika Den-Shimazaki
    Shimazaki Eye Cloinic, Tokyo, Japan
  • Masamichi Saga
    Ichikawa Shapo Eye Clinic, Ichikawa, Japan
  • Kazumi Fukagawa
    Ryogoku Eye Clinic, Tokyo, Japan
    Iidabashi Eye Clinic, Tokyo, Japan
  • Miki Sakata
    Shinjuku Eye Clinic, Tokyo, Japan
  • Miki Iwasaki
    Ryogoku Eye Clinic, Tokyo, Japan
  • Takashi Okano
    Smile Eye Clinic, Yokohama, Japan
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Jun Shimazaki, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. (F), Saten Pharmaceutical Co. (F); Seika Den-Shimazaki, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. (F), Santen Pharmaceutical Co. (F); Masamichi Saga, None; Kazumi Fukagawa, None; Miki Sakata, None; Miki Iwasaki, None; Takashi Okano, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Supported by the Santen Pharmaceutical Company
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 2866. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jun Shimazaki, Seika Den-Shimazaki, Masamichi Saga, Kazumi Fukagawa, Miki Sakata, Miki Iwasaki, Takashi Okano; Prospective, randomized trial of the two mucin secretogogues for the treatment of dry eye in office workers.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):2866.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose : Purpose: Previous studies indicated that the prolonged computer use was associated with the development of one of dry eye. The present study was conducted to examine the efficacy and safety of two kinds of commercially available mucin secretogogues, diquafosol (Diquas®, Santen Pharmaceutical Co.) and rebamipide (Mucosta®, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co.)ophthalmic solutions, for the treatment of office worker-related dry eye.

Methods : Methods: This is a prospective, randomized clinical trial involving seven ophthalmic clinic/hospitals. Dry eye patients aged between 20 and 60 years, who has been engaged in computer works for more than 4 hours/day, were enrolled. Contact lens users were not included. Dry eye diagnosis was made according to the Japan Dry Eye Criteria. They were randomly assigned to treat with one of the following mucin secretogogue ophthalmic solutions; diquafosol eye drops 6 times/day (DQS group), and rebamipide eye drops 4 times/day (REB group). Subjective symptom score using the Dry eye related quality of life score (DEQS), tear film break-up time (BUT), conjunctival and cornea fluorescein scores, and Schirmer’s test I as well as general ophthalmic examinations were performed before, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after the treatment. Questionnaire for comfort/discomfort on the eye drop use and willing to continue the treatment was also conducted.

Results : Results: Twenty-seven and 24 patients were studied in the DQS and REB groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the preoperative conditions such as age, sex and severity of dry eye (P>0.05). Subjective symptom score and BUT was significantly improved at 4 weeks following treatment in both groups (P<0.001 and P<0.01, respectively), and there were no differences between the groups. The patients reported that the comfort on eye drop use was significantly better in the DQS group than REB group (P=0.024), and they preferred continuing DQS eye drops to REB eye drops (P=0.043). There were no significant changes in fluorescein score in both groups. No significant side effects were noted in neither of the groups.

Conclusions : Conclusions: Both diquafosol and rebamipide ophthalmic solutions were effective for the treatment of dry eye in office workers.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.


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.