Abstract
Purpose: This study was conducted to investigate the change of soft contact lens parameters after eyeliner depositionand compare the cleaning efficiency and the recovery rate of lens parameters by different cleaning methods.
Methods: The eyeliner was deposited on three types of soft contact lenses made of different materials for 1 hour,4 hours and 6 hours and those lenses were washed by the eyeglasses ultrasonic cleaning and by hands. Thechanges in visible light transmittance, diameter and surface of those lenses were compared before and aftercleaning of the lens. Results: The visible light transmittance of soft contact lenses decreased along with thedeposition time of eyeliner. The patterns of the eyeliner deposition on soft contact lens appeared differentlydepending on the physical properties of the lens material. Thus, the largest eyeliner deposition was found onnarafilcon A lens. The diameters of hilafilcon B and etafilcon A lenses were decreased, however, the diameter ofnarafilcon A lens was increased. The cleaning efficiency of the eyeliner deposition was greater with the multipurposesolution by hands than with the eyeglasses ultrasonic cleaner. However, the recovery of lens parameterssuch as the lens diameter, visible light transmittance and lens surface due to the eyeliner deposition to its originalstate was limited. Conclusions: From these results, it is suggested to minimize eye makeup when wearing softcontact lens. Furthermore, the reduced wearing time and shorter cycle of lens replacement may be needed byconsidering a change of lens parameter when the repeat eye makeup is applied.
Methods: The eyeliner was deposited on three types of soft contact lenses made of different materials for 1 hour,4 hours and 6 hours and those lenses were washed by the eyeglasses ultrasonic cleaning and by hands. Thechanges in visible light transmittance, diameter and surface of those lenses were compared before and aftercleaning of the lens. Results: The visible light transmittance of soft contact lenses decreased along with thedeposition time of eyeliner. The patterns of the eyeliner deposition on soft contact lens appeared differentlydepending on the physical properties of the lens material. Thus, the largest eyeliner deposition was found onnarafilcon A lens. The diameters of hilafilcon B and etafilcon A lenses were decreased, however, the diameter ofnarafilcon A lens was increased. The cleaning efficiency of the eyeliner deposition was greater with the multipurposesolution by hands than with the eyeglasses ultrasonic cleaner. However, the recovery of lens parameterssuch as the lens diameter, visible light transmittance and lens surface due to the eyeliner deposition to its originalstate was limited. Conclusions: From these results, it is suggested to minimize eye makeup when wearing softcontact lens. Furthermore, the reduced wearing time and shorter cycle of lens replacement may be needed byconsidering a change of lens parameter when the repeat eye makeup is applied.
| Translated title of the contribution | Comparisons of the Change in Soft Contact Lenses Parameters and the Cleaning Efficiency after Eyeliner Deposition |
|---|---|
| Original language | Korean |
| Pages (from-to) | 107-115 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | 한국안광학회지 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 2013 |