Estimation of Degree of Dehydration in Different Hydrogel Lenses Used During 10 Consecutive Hours
Dehydration in contact lenses causes changes in the material, which provokes alterations in thelens’ characteristics. Objective: To evaluate the degree of dehydration in three types of hydrogelcontact lenses after ten consecutive hours of use. Materials and methods: 24 hydrogel contactlenses were ev...
| Autor Principal: | Rey Rodríguez, Diana Valeria |
|---|---|
| Formato: | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| Idioma: | spa |
| Publicado: |
Universidad de La Salle. Revistas. Ciencia y Tecnología para la Salud Visual y Ocular.
2011
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: |
http://revistas.lasalle.edu.co/index.php/sv/article/view/135 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: |
Dehydration in contact lenses causes changes in the material, which provokes alterations in thelens’ characteristics. Objective: To evaluate the degree of dehydration in three types of hydrogelcontact lenses after ten consecutive hours of use. Materials and methods: 24 hydrogel contactlenses were evaluated: 8 Polymacon, 8 Ocufilcon D and 8 Vasurfilcon A. The lens was evaluatedthrough a gravimetric method established by the ISO standards in order to determine the watercontent. Patients wore a contact lens in each eye for ten hours, after which the water content wasonce again evaluated at the laboratory in order to establish the dehydration percentages. Results:The water content of the Polymacon lens was 41.83%, which is different from the one reportedby the manufacturer (38.6%), with a p-value of 0.015. The Omafilcon A lens showed a value of58.81% different from the one reported by the manufacturer (60%), with a p-value of 0.006. TheVasurfilcon lens showed a value of 74.0%, as reported by the manufacturer, with a p-value of 0.83. Asignificance level of 5% was used. The average dehydration percentage after ten hours of use for thePolymacon lens was 12.1%; 3.7% for the Omafilcon; and 6.5% for the Vasurfilcon A. Conclusions:The Varsulfilcon A lens showed the same value reported by the manufacturer. The Omafilcon Alens showed a lesser degree of dehydration after using it compared to the other hydrogel lensesunder study. No direct link was found between the water content and the dehydration percentage. |
|---|