Comparison of the Pre-Lens Tear Film Stability and Visual Performance of a Novel and Two Other Daily Disposable Contact Lenses in Healthcare Professionals Wearing Facial Masks for Prolonged Time

Abstract

Objective

To compare a novel daily disposable contact lens (DDCL) verofilcon A with other DDCL materials in terms of pre-lens tear film (PLTF) stabilization and visual performance for prolonged use in healthcare professionals with the use of masks.

Methods

Subjects aged 20–40 years old were prospectively randomized into three study groups. Group 1: verofilcon A, group 2: nesofilcon A and group 3: senofilcon A. The subjects were evaluated at baseline with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), non-invasive tear break up time (NIBUT) of pre-lens tear film, and high order aberrations (HoAs). After 28 days of CL use, NIBUT at 1, 4, 8, and 12 h, HoAs, contrast sensitivity (CS) with CVS100-E and contact lens dry eye questionnaire-8 (CLDEQ-8) were evaluated.

Results

Between August and September 2021, 147 eyes of 77 subjects were included in the three study groups. At day 28, the CS scores at 18 cycles per degree, spatial frequencies, and the mean NIBUT scores at 4, 8, and 12 h were higher in the verofilcon A group compared to the nesofilcon A and at 12 h were higher compared to the senofilcon A (p < 0.05). The mean HoAs and CLDEQ-8 test scores were higher in the nesofilcon A group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest the superiority of the PLTF stabilization ability of verofilcon A in healthcare professionals with prolonged use of mask. The improved CS and NIBUT scores of this lens could be explained by a new and unique surface technology with greater than 80% water content.

Keywords:

• facial mask
• HoAs
• nesofilcon A
• NIBUT
• senofilcon A
• verofilcon A

Data Sharing Statement

Data are available on request from the authors.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent was obtained for identifiable health information included in this study. The manuscript has been read and approved by all authors. In addition, each author believes that the manuscript represents an honest work.

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this work.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by an investigator-initiated trial grant IIT #66288565 from Alcon SA.