2011British Journal of OphthalmologyRequires access

Barriers to clinical uptake of tear osmolarity measurements

Santosh Khanal, T. J. Millar

Open publisher page 93 citations

Abstract

AIM: The aim of the study was to examine the possibilities of measuring tear osmolarity in a general clinical setting, and to identify the barriers preventing the uptake of new methodologies for its measurement. METHODS: Five non-contact-lens wearers were recruited to evaluate the diagnostic capability of the TearLab. Three osmolarity measurements were taken at 1 min intervals in the morning at 09:00, midday between 12:00 and 13:00 and afternoon at 16:00 for two consecutive days. Forty more osmolarity measurements were carried out at different times on one subject with low and one subject with high tear osmolarity over 4 months. The osmolarity of a standard solution, 290 mOsm/l, was measured 19 times alternatively with the TearLab by two examiners. RESULTS: Consecutive tear osmolarity readings in an individual varied up to 35 mOsm/l, but an average over three readings was found to be a reliable indicator of tear osmolarity at 95% confidence level. For population studies, a power analysis based on the variability of the data showed that three repeat measurements would be required to obtain reliable data for a study with <50 subjects, whereas one measurement would suffice for 490 or more subjects. There were no interobserver or interinstrumental differences, but readings obtained for the standard solution varied up to 89 mOsm/l. CONCLUSION: Three consecutive readings are required with the TearLab to obtain a reliable measure of tear osmolarity. The variation in recorded tear osmolarity makes it difficult to use the technique for the diagnosis of mild dry eye.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM: The aim of the study was to examine the possibilities of measuring tear osmolarity in a general clinical setting, and to identify the barriers preventing the uptake of new methodologies for its measurement. METHODS: Five non-contact-lens wearers were recruited to evaluate the diagnostic capability of the TearLab. Three osmolarity measurements were taken at 1 min intervals in the morning at 09:00, midday between 12:00 and 13:00 and afternoon at 16:00 for two consecutive days. Forty more osmolarity measurements were carried out at different times on one subject with low and one subject with high tear osmolarity over 4 months. The osmolarity of a standard solution, 290 mOsm/l, was measured 19 times alternatively with the TearLab by two examiners. RESULTS: Consecutive tear osmolarity readings in an individual varied up to 35 mOsm/l, but an average over three readings was found to be a reliable indicator of tear osmolarity at 95% confidence level. For population studies, a power analysis based on the variability of the data showed that three repeat measurements would be required to obtain reliable data for a study with <50 subjects, whereas one measurement would suffice for 490 or more subjects. There were no interobserver or interinstrumental differences, but readings obtained for the standard solution varied up to 89 mOsm/l. CONCLUSION: Three consecutive readings are required with the TearLab to obtain a reliable measure of tear osmolarity. The variation in recorded tear osmolarity makes it difficult to use the technique for the diagnosis of mild dry eye.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 93 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIM: The aim of the study was to examine the possibilities of measuring tear osmolarity in a general clinical setting, and to identify the barriers preventing the uptake of new methodologies for its measurement. METHODS: Five non-contact-lens wearers were recruited to evaluate the diagnostic capability of the TearLab. Three osmolarity measurements were taken at 1 min intervals in the morning at 09:00, midday between 12:00 and 13:00 and afternoon at 16:00 for two consecutive days. Forty more osmolarity measurements were carried out at different times on one subject with low and one subject with high tear osmolarity over 4 months. The osmolarity of a standard solution, 290 mOsm/l, was measured 19 times alternatively with the TearLab by two examiners. RESULTS: Consecutive tear osmolarity readings in an individual varied up to 35 mOsm/l, but an average over three readings was found to be a reliable indicator of tear osmolarity at 95% confidence level. For population studies, a power analysis based on the variability of the data showed that three repeat measurements would be required to obtain reliable data for a study with <50 subjects, whereas one measurement would suffice for 490 or more subjects. There were no interobserver or interinstrumental differences, but readings obtained for the standard solution varied up to 89 mOsm/l. CONCLUSION: Three consecutive readings are required with the TearLab to obtain a reliable measure of tear osmolarity. The variation in recorded tear osmolarity makes it difficult to use the technique for the diagnosis of mild dry eye.

Key concepts: Medicine, Osmotic concentration, Ophthalmology, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Barriers to clinical uptake of tear osmolarity measurements — Research Paper | ScholarLens