The TFOS international workshop on contact lens discomfort: report of the contact lens materials, design, and care subcommittee

Jones, L., Brennan, N. A., González-Méijome, J., Lally, J., Maldonado-Codina, C., Schmidt, T. A., … Nichols, J. J. (2013). The TFOS International Workshop on Contact Lens Discomfort: Report of the Contact Lens Materials, Design, and Care Subcommittee. Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science, 54(11), TFOS37. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-13215Examining the role of the contact lens material, design, and the care system is fundamental to understanding contact lens discomfort (CLD). However, a systematic review that tries to determine the governing factors is fraught with difficulties. A lack of a validated “instrument” (or single validated questionnaire) for measuring discomfort makes it impossible to compare between studies because reported levels of comfort (or discomfort) are inconsistent. Subject classifications can vary widely, from studies that include only neophytes or asymptomatic contact lens (CL) wearers to studies including only those contact lens–wearing subjects who experience marked dryness or symptoms of discomfort. Also, it is difficult to measure issues of importance in isolation because changing one factor in a contact lens or care solution can invariably affect another. An illustration of this relates to a change in hydrogel water content, which also affects oxygen permeability, oxygen transmissibility, modulus, and possibly lens thickness. Finally, various confounding factors between studies also make true comparisons problematic. Typical examples would include differences between brands of lenses made from the same material (which may have differing geometric designs, edge configuration, or production methods); wearing modality (lenses may be worn on a daily wear [DW] basis, overnight occasionally, or for up to 30 nights on a continuous wear [CW] basis); duration of use prior to replacement, wearing time during the day (from just a few hours to most of the day); and care product differences or exposures (which could range from no exposure in the case of daily disposable [DD] materials to a preserved system that has extensive uptake and release from the contact lens material being examined). The purpose of this report is to summarize evidence-linking associations, mechanistic and etiological factors between contact lens materials, designs, and care solutions with CLD. The potential factors associated with this are many and varied, and graphically display the complexity of this issue

The TFOS International Workshop on Contact Lens Discomfort: report of the management and therapy subcommittee.

Erratum in Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014 Sep;55(9):5588. Miller, William S [coorected to Miller, William L]

The TFOS International Workshop on Contact Lens Discomfort: Executive Summary

Contact lens discomfort (CLD) is a frequently experienced problem, with most estimates suggesting that up to half of contact lens wearers experience this problem with some frequency or magnitude. This condition impacts millions of contact lens wearers worldwide. Yet, there is a paucity of consensus and standardization in the scientific and clinical communities on the characterization of the condition, including the definition, classification, epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, management, influence of contact lens materials, designs and care, and the proper design of clinical trials. \ud \ud The Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society (TFOS), which is a nonprofit organization, has conducted two prior international, consensus building workshops, including the Dry Eye WorkShop (DEWS; available in the public domain at http://www.tearfilm.org/tearfilm-reports-dews-report.php) and the Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Workshop (MGD; available in the public domain at http://www.tearfilm.org/tearfilm-reports-mgdreport.php). To that end, TFOS initiated the process of conducting a similar workshop in January 2012—a process that took approximately 18 months to complete and included 79 experts in the field. These experts participated in one or more topical subcommittees, and were assigned with taking an evidence-based approach at evaluating CLD. Eight topical subcommittees were formed, with each generating a related report, all of which were circulated for presentation, review, and input of the entire workshop membership. \ud \ud The entire workshop originally is being published in this issue of IOVS, in English, with subsequent translations into numerous other languages. All of this information is intended to be available and accessible online, free of charge. This article is intended to serve as an Executive Summary of the eight subcommittee reports, and all information contained here was abstracted from the full reports