Purpose: To evaluate the use of moisture chamber goggles in diagnosing dry eye.
Methods: Participants (1 0 contact lens wearers and 10 non-contact lens wearers) completed a Comprehensive Dry Eye Questionnaire (CDEQ) and the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI). Subjects were also asked to subjectively rank their dry eye symptoms from one to ten. Tear break-up times (TBUT) were measured non-invasively before, during and after goggle-wear using a modified Keratometer. The time it took to report relief of dry eye symptoms while wearing the goggles was recorded.
Results: We used the Pearson Correlation test to compare subjective and objective measurements of dry eye with the amount of time it took to report relief of symptoms with the goggles on. We found a correlation between initial subjective rank of dry eye symptoms and goggle-wear time (p = 0.028). However, we found no significant correlation between goggle-wear time and dry eye questionnaire scores nor length of TBUT. A one-way analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) was performed to compare the differences between the contact lens group and non-contact lens group. All comparisons yielded a p-value of greater than 0.05 (not significant).
Conclusions: Moisture chamber goggles are not recommended for the evaluation of dry eye severity in the clinical setting. There was little correlation between goggle wear-time and subjective and objective measures of dry eye. The test is time-consuming and patients will have difficulty assessing when relief of their dry eye symptoms is achieved. It would be more useful for assessing dry eye in a patient that wanted or required a noninvasive procedure.
Files are restricted to Pacific University. Sign in to view.