A multi-country assessment of compliance with daily disposable contact lens wear.

PURPOSE: To investigate compliance with daily disposable contact lens (DDCL) wear and investigate re-use of lenses according to country and DDCL material worn. METHODS: Optometrists invited eligible DDCL patients from their practices to participate in a survey on DDCL wear in Australia, Norway, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US). Eligible participants completed an online or paper version of the survey. RESULTS: 805 participants completed the survey (96% online): Australia 13%, Norway 32%, UK 17%, US 38%. The median age was 38 years; 66% were female. Silicone hydrogel (SiHy) DDCLs were worn by 14%. Overall, 9% were non-compliant with DDCL replacement; Australia 18%, US 12%, UK 7% and Norway 4%. There were no differences with respect to sex, years of contact lens wear experience or DDCL material (SiHy versus hydrogels). The primary reason for re-use was "to save money" (60%). Re-use of DDCLs resulted in inferior comfort at insertion and prior to lens removal (p=0.001). 75% reported occasional napping and 28% reported sleeping overnight for at least one night in the preceding month, while wearing their DDCLs. CONCLUSION: Non-compliance with replacement of DDCLs occurred in all countries investigated; the rate was highest in Australia and lowest in Norway. Re-use of DDCLs was associated with reduced comfort. DDCL wearers often reported wearing lenses overnight. It is important for optometrists to counsel their patients on the importance of appropriate lens wear and replacement for DDCLs.

Effect of lens base curve on subjective comfort and assessment of fit with silicone hydrogel continuous wear contact lenses.

PURPOSE: To study the effect of base curve on subjective comfort of silicone hydrogel extended wear lenses. METHODS: Ninety-five subjects were first trial fitted with 8.6-mm base curve lotrafilcon A (Focus Night & Day) lenses and then with 8.4-mm lenses only if poor subjective comfort or poor fit was present. Comfort and fit were assessed after 15 min. Subjects with discomfort or signs of poor fit were then trial fitted with 8.4-mm lenses. RESULTS: Of 190 eyes, 74.2% were fitted with 8.6-mm lenses, and 23.7% required 8.4-mm lenses. Two (2.1 %) subjects could not be fitted with either base curve. Mean steep keratometry (K) reading for eyes dispensed with 8.6-mm lenses was 43.88 D and 45.56 D for eyes dispensed in the 8.4-mm lenses (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A clinically useful criterion showing the need for 8.4-mm lenses was steep K of > or = 45.50 D; 77% of these eyes required the steeper lens for good comfort and fit. Subjective discomfort with 8.6-mm lenses was also a useful signal for the need of a steeper lens; mean comfort scores for those subjects rose from 6.33 with 8.6-mm lenses to 9.44 with the 8.4-mm lenses for eyes requiring the steeper lens (p < 0.001).