Quality of Life in Digital Device Users Who are Treated with Systane Hydration PF

Abstract

Purpose

To understand the impact of Systane Hydration PF on dryness symptoms and quality of life in digital device users and to determine if participants prefer either the unit-dose or multi-dose dispensing system of Systane Hydration PF.

Materials and Methods

This 2-week, three visit study recruited regular digital device users. Participants were required to score ≤80 on the Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) Quality of Life (QoL) Work domain and between 13 and 32 on the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. Participants were randomized to either Systane Hydration PF unit-dose or multi-dose for 1 week and switched to the alternative dosing system for the second week. Participations were evaluated by completing the full IDEEL-QoL module and OSDI questionnaire at each visit. Likert surveys were completed to probe dispensing system preferences.

Results

Thirty participants with a mean ± SD age of 28.6 ± 12.0 years (70% female) were recruited. Participants had significant improvements in all three IDEEL-QoL domains as well as in OSDI scores (all p < 0.0001). Participants had similar preferences for the two dispensing systems, though they were more likely to indicate that they thought that the multi-dose bottle was more environmentally friendly than the unit-dose vials.

Conclusion

Digital device users with dry eye symptoms had meaningful improvements in eye comfort and quality of life scores after being treated with Systane Hydration PF for 2 weeks. Participants did not have a clear dispensing system preference suggesting that the best dispensing system may depend on the patient.

Keywords:

• artificial tears
• digital eye strain
• dry eye disease
• symptoms
• Systane Hydration PF

Data Sharing Statement

No data beyond what is reported in this manuscript will be publicly shared.

Acknowledgments

Alcon Research, LLC supported this study. REDCap data collection was supported by the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s CTSA Grant (UL1TR001417).

Disclosures

The authors have received research support from AbbVie Pharmaceuticals (CL), Alcon Research, LLC (All), Allergan (CL), Art Optical (ADP), Bausch & Lomb (ADP), and Euclid Systems (ADP) and have served as consultants for Alcon Research, LLC (ADP), CooperVision (ADP), EpiTech (ADP), EyeGate Pharmaceuticals, Inc (ADP), Kala Pharmaceuticals (ADP), Lexitas (ADP), MacuLogix (CL), Nevakar Inc (ADP), Optikal Care Inc (ADP), RVL Pharmaceuticals, Inc (CL), Transitions (CL), and Transitions Optical (CL) over the past 3 years. Dr Pucker is currently an employee of Lexitas Pharma Services; however, he was employed by the University of Alabama at Birmingham during the conduct of this work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.