Cargando…

Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment

PURPOSE: To examine the factors which contribute to tear stability and the validity and reliability of methods used for assessing tear break up time which is a core part of an examination of tear stability in dry eye patients. METHODS: A review of publications which are relevant to tear stability an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Mcmonnies, Charles W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6147744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29337016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.11.004
_version_ 1783356617678389248
author Mcmonnies, Charles W.
author_facet Mcmonnies, Charles W.
author_sort Mcmonnies, Charles W.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To examine the factors which contribute to tear stability and the validity and reliability of methods used for assessing tear break up time which is a core part of an examination of tear stability in dry eye patients. METHODS: A review of publications which are relevant to tear stability and its assessment. RESULTS: Tear break up time may be more invasive than intended if difficulty avoiding blinking during assessment results in reflex tearing. Notwithstanding control of instilled volume and concentration of fluorescein, on-eye dilution is highly variable according to resident tear volume. Blinking to evenly distribute fluorescein may improve tear and lipid layer thickness so habitual tear function is not assessed. Emphasis on a role for Meibomian gland dysfunction as a cause of tear instability may be appropriate in many cases but ignores the roles for other sources of tear lipid and other non-lipid contributions to tear instability such as aqueous or mucus deficiency, desiccated epitheliopathy or anomalous blinking. Objective less-invasive methods eliminate problems of inter-observer variability and can reliably ‘maintain vigilance’ over wide areas of the tear layer. However less-invasive results to date include mean tear break up findings which are both shorter and longer than expected for normal controls. CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescein tear break up time assessments cannot be standardised and less-invasive methods are not yet standardised. Objective less-invasive and subjective fluorescein break up time tests do not appear to be measuring the same tear phenomena although both should be performed before other invasive procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6147744
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61477442018-09-26 Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment Mcmonnies, Charles W. J Optom Review article PURPOSE: To examine the factors which contribute to tear stability and the validity and reliability of methods used for assessing tear break up time which is a core part of an examination of tear stability in dry eye patients. METHODS: A review of publications which are relevant to tear stability and its assessment. RESULTS: Tear break up time may be more invasive than intended if difficulty avoiding blinking during assessment results in reflex tearing. Notwithstanding control of instilled volume and concentration of fluorescein, on-eye dilution is highly variable according to resident tear volume. Blinking to evenly distribute fluorescein may improve tear and lipid layer thickness so habitual tear function is not assessed. Emphasis on a role for Meibomian gland dysfunction as a cause of tear instability may be appropriate in many cases but ignores the roles for other sources of tear lipid and other non-lipid contributions to tear instability such as aqueous or mucus deficiency, desiccated epitheliopathy or anomalous blinking. Objective less-invasive methods eliminate problems of inter-observer variability and can reliably ‘maintain vigilance’ over wide areas of the tear layer. However less-invasive results to date include mean tear break up findings which are both shorter and longer than expected for normal controls. CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescein tear break up time assessments cannot be standardised and less-invasive methods are not yet standardised. Objective less-invasive and subjective fluorescein break up time tests do not appear to be measuring the same tear phenomena although both should be performed before other invasive procedures. Elsevier 2018 2018-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6147744/ /pubmed/29337016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.11.004 Text en © 2017 Spanish General Council of Optometry. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review article
Mcmonnies, Charles W.
Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title_full Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title_fullStr Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title_full_unstemmed Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title_short Tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
title_sort tear instability importance, mechanisms, validity and reliability of assessment
topic Review article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6147744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29337016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.11.004
work_keys_str_mv AT mcmonniescharlesw tearinstabilityimportancemechanismsvalidityandreliabilityofassessment