A Clinical Comparison of Two Daily Disposable Soft Contact Lenses
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Manchester, United Kingdom, M13 9PL
- Eurolens Research - The University of Manchester
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Subjects will only be eligible for the study if:
- They are between 18 and 40 years of age (inclusive).
- They understand their rights as a research subject and are willing and able to sign a Statement of Informed Consent.
- They are willing and able to follow the protocol.
- They are an existing soft reusable spherical contact lens wearer in both eyes.
- They have a contact lens spherical prescription between -0.50 to -6.00D (inclusive) based on the ocular refraction.
- They have a cylindrical correction of -0.875DC or less in each eye based on the ocular refraction
- They own a wearable pair of spectacles and wear them on the day of the initial visit.
- They have distance high contrast logMAR visual acuity of 0.2 or better in each eye with their habitual spectacles.
- They agree not to participate in other clinical research for the duration of the study.
Exclusion Criteria:
- They have an ocular disorder which would normally contra-indicate contact lens wear.
- They have a systemic disorder which would normally contra-indicate contact lens wear.
- They are using any topical medication such as eye drops or ointment.
- They are aphakic.
- They have had corneal refractive surgery.
- They have any corneal distortion resulting from previous hard or rigid lens wear or have keratoconus.
- They are pregnant or breastfeeding.
- They have any infectious disease which would, in the opinion of the investigator, contraindicate contact lens wear or pose a risk to study personnel; or they have any immunosuppressive disease (e.g. HIV), or a history of anaphylaxis or severe allergic reaction.
- They have taken part in any other contact lens or care solution clinical trial or research, within two weeks prior to starting this study.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Other
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: somofilcon A then stenfilcon A contact lens
Participants were fitted with comfilcon A lens on a daily wear, reusable basis for 1 month, then randomized to wear somofilcon A daily disposable test lens for 1 week of daily wear and stenfilcon A daily disposable test lens for 1 week of daily wear.
|
Contact Lens
Other Names:
daily disposable contact lens
Other Names:
daily disposable contact lens
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: stenfilcon A then somofilcon A contact lens
Participants were fitted with comfilcon A lens on a daily wear, reusable basis for 1 month, then randomized to wear stenfilcon A daily disposable test lens for 1 week of daily wear and somofilcon A daily disposable test lens for 1 week of daily wear.
|
Contact Lens
Other Names:
daily disposable contact lens
Other Names:
daily disposable contact lens
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Subjective Scores of Comfort at Insertion After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon A Use
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Subjective Scores of comfort at Insertion after 4 weeks of Comfilcon A use rated on a scale 0-100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
4 weeks
|
|
Subjective Scores of Comfort on Insertion
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Subjective Scores of Comfort on Insertion rated on a scale 0 -100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
1 week
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Subjective Scores on Overall Comfort After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon Use
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Subjective scores on overall comfort after 4 weeks of comfilcon use rated on a scale 0 -100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
4 weeks
|
|
Subjective Scores on Overall Comfort
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Subjective Scores on overall comfort rated on a scale 0 - 100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
1 week
|
|
Subjective Scores on Comfort Before Removal After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon Use
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Subjective Scores on Comfort before removal after 4 weeks of comfilcon use rated on a scale 0-100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
4 weeks
|
|
Subjective Scores on Comfort Before Removal
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Subjective Scores on Comfort before removal rated on a scale 0-100 (0=causes pain, cannot be tolerated, 100=excellent, cannot be felt).
|
1 week
|
|
Number of Participants With Horizontal Lens Centration Grade
Time Frame: Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
Number of Participants with Horizontal Lens centration graded on scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely nasal, -1 slightly nasal, 0=optimum, 1=slightly temporal, 2=extremely temporal)
|
Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
|
Number of Participants With Horizontal Lens Centration Grade After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon A Wear
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Number of Participants with Horizontal lens centration after 4 weeks of comfilcon A wear graded on scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely nasal, -1 slightly nasal, 0=optimum, 1=slightly temporal, 2=extremely temporal)
|
4 weeks
|
|
Number of Participants With Horizontal Lens Centration Grade
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Number of Participants with Horizontal Lens centration graded on scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely nasal, -1 slightly nasal, 0=optimum, 1=slightly temporal, 2=extremely temporal)
|
1 week
|
|
Number of Participants With Vertical Lens Centration Grade
Time Frame: Baseline (After 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
Number of Participants with Vertical lens centration graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely inferior, -1 slightly inferior, 0=optimum, 1=slightly superior, 2=extremely superior)
|
Baseline (After 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
|
Number of Participants With Vertical Lens Centration Grade After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon A Wear
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Number of Participants with Vertical lens centration after 4 weeks of comfilcon A wear graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely inferior, -1 slightly inferior, 0=optimum, 1=slightly superior, 2=extremely superior)
|
4 weeks
|
|
Number of Participants With Vertical Lens Centration Grade
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Number of Participants with Vertical lens centration graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2= Extremely inferior, -1 slightly inferior, 0=optimum, 1=slightly superior, 2=extremely superior)
|
1 week
|
|
Number of Participants With Lens Corneal Coverage Grade
Time Frame: Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
Number of Participants with Lens Corneal coverage graded on a scale -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
|
Number of Participants With Lens Corneal Coverage Grade After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon A Wear
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Number of Participants with Lens Corneal coverage after 4 weeks of comfilcon A wear graded on a scale -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
4 weeks
|
|
Number of Participants With Lens Corneal Coverage Grade
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Number of Participants with Lens Corneal coverage graded on a scale -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
1 week
|
|
Number of Participants With Post-Blink Movement Grade
Time Frame: Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
Number of Participants with Post-blink movement graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
|
Number of Participants With Post-Blink Movement Grade After 4 Weeks of Comfilcon A Wear
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Number of Participants with Post-blink movement after 4 weeks of comfilcon A wear graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
4 weeks
|
|
Number of Participants With Post-Blink Movement Grade
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Number of Participants with Post-blink movement graded on a scale of -2 to 2 ( -2=extremely inadequate, -1=slightly inadequate, but acceptable, 0=optimum, 1=slightly excessive, but acceptable, 2=extremely excessive)
|
1 week
|
|
Investigator Lens Fit Acceptance
Time Frame: Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
Lens fit acceptance investigator rating for acceptable and optimum fits on 1-5 Likert Scale (1=strongly agree, 2- Agree.
3- Neither agree not disagree, 4- Disagree, 5=strongly disagree)
|
Baseline (after 5 minutes of lens dispense)
|
|
Investigator Lens Fit Acceptance for Comfilcon A After 4 Weeks of Use
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Lens fit acceptance investigator rating for comfilcon A after 4 weeks of use for acceptable and optimum fits on 1-5 Likert Scale (1=strongly agree, 2- Agree.
3- Neither agree not disagree, 4- Disagree, 5=strongly disagree)
|
4 weeks
|
|
Investigator Lens Fit Acceptance
Time Frame: 1 week
|
Lens fit acceptance investigator rating for acceptable and optimum fits on 1-5 Likert Scale (1=strongly agree, 2- Agree.
3- Neither agree not disagree, 4- Disagree, 5=strongly disagree)
|
1 week
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Carole Maldonado-Codina, PhD, MCOptom, FAAO, FBCLA, Eurolens Research
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- EX-MKTG-100
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.