Introduction:Patients expect to have excellent vision and comfort when wearing soft contact lenses.The purpose of this study was to compare the wear experiences of participants with astigmatism when wearing a daily disposable soft toric lens to an established, commonly used reusable toric lens.Methods: In this crossover study, habitual soft toric lens wearers were fit with a daily replacement soft toric lens (delefilcon A) and a reusable, 1-month replacement soft toric lens (comfilcon A) in a randomized order.After 30 days of wear, Visual analog scale (VAS) surveys were used to assess wear experience, including vision and comfort, for overall wear and end-of-day wear.Scores were compared statistically with mixed-effects linear models.Participants also responded to questions about convenience, ease of use, and satisfaction with both lenses and preference questions based upon comfort, vision, and overall performance.Results: Fifty-nine participants completed the multi-site crossover study.VAS scores [mean(std dev)] for overall quality of vision for the delefilcon A [80.4(16.4)]and comfilcon A [66.8(27.7)]lenses were statistically significant (P=0.002).The difference in the mean overall comfort scores for the delefilcon A lenses [71.6(26.3)]and comfilcon A lenses [63.2(28.9)]was 8.4, which exceeds the establish criteria for clinical significance, although not statistically significant (P=0.08).Overall satisfaction scores were 68.8(26.9)for the delefilcon A and 59.7(30.3)for the comfilcon A lenses (P=0.08).Both lenses provided mean binocular visual acuities better than 20/20 Snellen equivalent.Over half of the participants preferred the delefilcon A lenses based upon comfort, vision, and overall performance.Convenience, ease of use, and satisfaction all scored higher with delefilcon A lenses. Conclusion:The results of this study show that wear experience with delefilcon A lenses for astigmatism can meet or exceed that of comfilcon A toric lenses while also providing healthy, daily disposable lens wear.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fogt et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: