Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

Comparative Effects of USB-Powered Warm Compress and Self-Heating Eye Mask in the Management of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction

25. Mai 2026 aktualisiert von: Ali M Alsaqr, King Saud University

USB-Powered vs. Self-Heating Warm Compresses for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Trial

Why was this study done?

People with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD) often have dry, irritated eyes because the tiny oil glands in their eyelids do not work properly. Applying gentle heat to the eyelids is a common way to improve the flow of oil and relieve symptoms.

This study wanted to find out whether a USB-powered warm compress or a self-heating disposable eye mask works better and feels more comfortable for patients with MGD.

Who took part?

Adults diagnosed with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction were invited to participate. Each person tried both treatments, one after the other, with a short break between them (this is called a crossover design).

What did participants do?

In one treatment phase, participants used a USB-powered warm compress for about 10 minutes per day over two weeks.

In the other phase, they used a self-heating disposable eye mask for the same amount of time.

The order of treatments was randomized to avoid bias.

Before and after each treatment, eye tests and comfort questionnaires were completed.

What did the study measure?

The main goal was to see if the treatments improved:

Tear film stability (how long the tears stay on the eye surface)

Meibomian gland function (how well the glands release oil)

Eye comfort and dryness symptoms

What were the results?

Both the USB-powered warm compress and the self-heating eye mask helped improve tear stability and comfort.

However, the USB-powered device provided slightly better results in improving gland function and patient satisfaction.

No serious side effects or discomfort were reported.

What do these results mean?

Regular eyelid warming is an effective way to manage MGD and dry eye symptoms. Both devices are safe and easy to use, but a USB-powered warm compress may offer stronger and more consistent heat for better results.

Patients and eye-care professionals can choose the device that best fits daily routines, comfort, and lifestyle.

Who conducted the study?

The study was carried out by optometrists and vision scientists specializing in ocular surface disease and dry eye therapy.

It followed ethical approval and was reviewed by an institutional research board before beginning.

Why is this study important?

MGD is one of the most common causes of dry eye disease worldwide. Understanding which home-based treatment works best helps patients, families, and clinicians make informed choices about safe and effective care options.

Studienübersicht

Status

Abgeschlossen

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is a leading cause of evaporative dry eye, characterized by obstruction and altered secretion of the meibomian glands that results in tear film instability and ocular discomfort. Thermal therapy is considered a cornerstone in the management of MGD, as controlled eyelid warming can enhance lipid flow, reduce stagnation, and restore tear film quality. However, the effectiveness and convenience of commercially available warming devices may vary depending on their design and heat delivery mechanisms.

This randomized, prospective, crossover clinical trial was designed to compare the efficacy and user experience of two commonly used warming modalities: a USB-powered eyelid warming device and a disposable self-heating eye mask. Each participant received both interventions in separate treatment phases, with a washout period in between, to minimize inter-subject variability. The order of intervention was randomized, ensuring balanced exposure across participants.

The study primarily aimed to assess changes in tear film stability and meibomian gland function following each treatment. Additional measures included ocular surface comfort, tear meniscus height, and patient preference. Standardized clinical assessments were conducted before and after each intervention phase, and validated questionnaires were used to capture subjective symptoms and usability feedback. Safety and tolerability were monitored throughout all sessions.

This investigation sought to generate comparative data on the short-term outcomes of two practical home-based treatment methods for MGD. The crossover design provided the advantage of within-subject comparison, enhancing the precision of treatment effect estimates. The findings are expected to inform clinicians about device selection for eyelid warming therapy and contribute to patient-centered recommendations in dry eye and ocular surface management.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

15

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienorte

  • Saudi-Arabien
    • Central Region
      • Riyadh, Central Region, Saudi-Arabien, RIAYDH 113
        • King Saud University

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Erwachsene

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adults aged 18-40 years diagnosed with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD).

Baseline NITBUT < 10 seconds.

Willing to discontinue other lid therapies during the study period.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Active ocular infection or inflammation.

Recent ocular surgery (<3 months).

Use of contact lenses during the study period.

Systemic diseases affecting tear film (e.g., Sjögren's syndrome).

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Behandlung
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Crossover-Aufgabe
  • Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Experimental: USB-Powered Warm Compress
Will use A USB-Powered Warm Compress constant-temperature device delivering controlled eyelid warming (≈40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks
Gerät: USB-Powered Warm Compress
A constant-temperature device delivering controlled eyelid warming (≈40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks.
Andere Namen:
  • USB Warm Compress
Gerät: Self-Heating Eye Mask
A disposable eye mask activated by air oxidation, generating warmth (~40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks.
Experimental: Disposable eye mask
The group will use A disposable eye mask activated by air oxidation, generating warmth (~40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks
Gerät: USB-Powered Warm Compress
A constant-temperature device delivering controlled eyelid warming (≈40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks.
Andere Namen:
  • USB Warm Compress
Gerät: Self-Heating Eye Mask
A disposable eye mask activated by air oxidation, generating warmth (~40°C) for 10 minutes daily for 2 weeks.

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Tear Meniscus Height
Zeitfenster: Baseline at Day 1, post intervention at Day 3 and post intervention at Day 5.
To assess the tear film. The test was performed before and after each treatment phase to determine the improvement in tear film integrity following the application of each eyelid warming device.
Baseline at Day 1, post intervention at Day 3 and post intervention at Day 5.
Ocular Surface Disease Index
Zeitfenster: Baseline

he OSDI, which was created by the Outcomes Research Group at Allergan Inc in order to quickly assess the symptoms of ocular irritation in dry eye disease and how they affect functioning related to vision.[5] This 12-item questionnaire assesses dry eye symptoms and the effects it has on vision-related function in the past week of the patient's life.[6] The questionnaire has 3 subscales: ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers. Patients rate their responses on a 0 to 4 scale with 0 corresponding to "none of the time" and 4 corresponding to "all of the time." A final score is calculated which ranges from 0 to 100 with scores 0 to 12 representing normal, 13 to 22 representing mild dry eye disease, 23 to 32 representing moderate dry eye disease, and greater than 33 representing severe dry eye disease.[7]

The OSDI assesses quality of life measures, which aligns the questionnaire with Federal Food and Drug Administration's emphasis on utilizing patient-reported
Baseline
tear break-up time
Zeitfenster: Baseline at Day 1, post intervention at Day 3 and post intervention at Day 5.
Non-Invasive Tear Break-Up Time (NITBUT) to assess the stability and uniformity of the tear film. The test was performed before and after each treatment phase to determine the improvement in tear film integrity following the application of each eyelid warming device.
Baseline at Day 1, post intervention at Day 3 and post intervention at Day 5.
Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness
Zeitfenster: Baseline at Day 1 and post intervention at Day 5.
The SPEED questionnaire was designed by Korb and Blackie in order to quickly track the progression of dry eye symptoms over time.[9] This questionnaire gives a score from 0 to 28 that is the result of 8 items that assess frequency and severity of symptoms. The symptoms assessed include dryness, grittiness, scratchiness, irritation, burning, watering, soreness, and eye fatigue. The questionnaire further assesses whether these symptoms were not problematic, tolerable, uncomfortable, bothersome, or intolerable.[10] The questionnaire also monitored diurnal and symptoms changes over 3 months.[11] Validity of the questionnaire was determined by seeing how well it was able to segregate patients based on their symptoms, relative to the OSDI questionnaire (gold standard). The resulting sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 and 0.80 respectively.[11]
Baseline at Day 1 and post intervention at Day 5.

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Sponsor

King Saud University

Ermittler

  • Hauptermittler: Ali M ALSAQR, PHD, King Saud University

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Nützliche Links

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

5. Januar 2025

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

30. Mai 2025

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

30. Mai 2025

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

11. Mai 2026

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

25. Mai 2026

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

1. Juni 2026

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

1. Juni 2026

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

25. Mai 2026

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Mai 2026

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Schlüsselwörter

Zusätzliche relevante MeSH-Bedingungen

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • IRB No. E-25-9589

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

NEIN

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Trockenes Auge

Suchen Sie nach ähnlichen Studien

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

CROs by country

CROs in Bahamas

Bedingungen

Seltene Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

Nahrungsergänzungsmittel

Sponsor / Mitarbeiter

Standorte

Abonnieren