Abstract Introduction Midday fogging is a complication of scleral lens (SL) wear that interrupts clear vision during the course of wear. SLs can be made with a variety of gas permeable materials, sizes and surface treatments, and various solutions are available for storing the lenses and for filling them before application on the eye. Many of these factors have been implicated as possible contributors to midday fogging. This study explored the lens and solution properties in habitual SL wearers with and without midday fogging. Methods In this prospective study, 48 habitual SL wearers were evaluated and asked to report whether they experienced midday fogging and if they removed their lenses during the day. They completed the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), which is a validated tool for dry eye assessment. Lens parameters (material, coatings and diameter) and lens storage and filling solutions were documented. Backward elimination of regression terms evaluated the lens and solution properties in those with and without fogging. OSDI scores were compared using the Mann–Whitney analysis. Results Collectively, the lens properties and solutions accounted for 27.7% of the variance related to midday fogging. None of the factors alone had a significant impact upon midday fogging. The median (interquartile range) OSDI score for those with fogging [37 (35)] was significantly different from those without fogging [10 (15)], with the scores corresponding to severe dry eye and normal eyes, respectively. Conclusion SL wearers with midday fogging exhibited similar symptoms to patients with severe dry eye. Lens and solution characteristics may play a small role in patients with midday fogging, although changing just a single factor is not likely to impact its presence.
Keratoconus Patient Satisfaction and Care Burden with Corneal Gas‐permeable and Scleral Lenses
SIGNIFICANCE Scleral lenses (SLs) are increasingly being considered as the initial correction for patients with keratoconus. In this study, keratoconus patients report higher levels of comfort and visual satisfaction with SL compared with corneal gas‐permeable lenses (GPs). PURPOSE This study aimed to compare patient satisfaction and care burden associated with GP and SL for the management of keratoconus. METHODS An electronic survey was distributed by the National Keratoconus Foundation from October 2016 to March 2017. Age at diagnosis, initial and current treatment, lens complications, access to care, lens handling time, and annual out‐of‐pocket treatment costs were collected. Vision, lens comfort, and ease of use satisfaction were rated from 1 to 5. RESULTS A total of 422 responses were received, including 75 bilateral GP and 76 bilateral SL wearers. Scleral lens wearers had greater satisfaction with vision (3.2 ± 1.1 [SL] vs. 2.6 ± 1.1 [GP]; P <. 001) and comfort (3.3 ± 1.0 [SL] vs. 2.2 ± 1.2 [GP]; P <. 001) but similar ease of use satisfaction in both groups (2.8 ± 1.1 [SL] vs. 2.7 ± 1.1 [GP]; P <. 90). Both groups reported issues with cloudy or foggy vision (GP, 63%; SL, 58%) and contact lens discomfort (GP, 77%; SL, 67%). Although GP wearers reported more issues with lens movement or loss (40 [GP] vs. 18% [SL]), they had fewer difficulties with halos (53 vs. 72% [SL]) and lens handling (40%) compared with SL wearers (63%). Gas‐permeable lens (48%) and SL (45%) wearers spend 6 to 10 minutes daily handling their lenses. Sixty percent of GP wearers reported annual out‐of‐pocket cost expenses less than U.S.$1000, whereas only 41% of SL wearers reported the same. CONCLUSIONS Scleral lens wearers with keratoconus report greater satisfaction with vision and comfort than do GP wearers, although both groups reported cloudy vision and lens discomfort.