Multipurpose Disinfecting Solutions and Their Interactions With a Silicone Hydrogel Lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the compatibility of a new silicone hydrogel lens, asmofilcon A (with four multipurpose disinfecting solutions: OPTIFREE RepleniSH, ReNu MultiPlus, Solo-Care Aqua and MeniCare Soft). Ocular responses and subjective responses were monitored with each lens-care system combination. METHODS: The study was conducted as a prospective, bilateral, clinical trial with a single-masked investigator, and randomized cross-over design with four phases, (one for each care system). Each study phase comprised of two consecutive days of lens wear where the lenses were inserted on day 1 directly from the blister-packs and worn for over 8 hr, then inserted on day 2 after overnight disinfection with one of the study lens care systems. Twenty-five adapted soft contact lens wearers who were able to wear their habitual lenses comfortably for more than 12 hr were recruited. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in corneal staining found for all the lens-care systems when comparing the results of day 1 (from the blister pack) with day 2 (following care system use) (P < 0.05). ReNu MultiPlus solution had the highest grade for corneal staining at the 2-hr time point on day 2 which then decreased by 6 hr (P < 0.05). There was no difference between the lens care systems and the rating of subjective comfort over either of the two days. The rating of dryness and burning sensations were only slightly increased at 6 hr for all lens care systems except ReNu MultiPlus where burning was highest on insertion (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Corneal staining observed in this study does not seem to have been related to the presence of polyhexamethylene biguanide (0.0001% wv) that was present in three of the four care systems. Only one care system (ReNu MultiPlus) demonstrated an associated level of corneal staining that was statistically significant; however, this was not considered to be of clinical relevance. These results suggest that using this novel surface-treated silicone hydrogel lens may result in less lens and lens care-related interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".