Comparison of the clinical efficacy of preserved and preservative-free hydroxypropyl methylcellulose-dextran-containing eyedrops.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of two sustained-release formulation of artificial tear drops.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a randomized patient-masked clinical trial, a total 88 patients into two group A (n=41; with single dose of artificial tear, containing dextran 70, 1mg/ml and hypromellose, 3mg/ml hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) and group B (n=47; with multidose of artificial tear, containing 0.3g HPMC and 0.1g of dextran 70, with 0.01% benzalkonium chloride (BAK) as preservative) were completed the study. The ocular surface disease index (OSDI) questionnaire, tear break up time (TBUT), corneal and conjunctival staining and Schirmer test, were performed. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the differences among the two products. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

The mean of age of the participants in the Group A and B was 44.08±6.29 (range, 33-58 years) years and 45.83±8.42 (31-60 years), respectively. In comparing two groups before the intervention, the OSDI scores, the TBUT scores, the conjunctival and corneal staining scores and the Schirmer scores did not show statistically significant differences (p=0.339, p=0.640, p=0.334, p=0.807 and p=0.676, respectively). After 4 weeks, the OSDI scores, conjunctival and corneal staining scores showed improvement in compare to those before the intervention (p<0.001). But, the differences for the Schirmer test score and TBUT score was not significant (p=0.115, p=0.013, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our outcomes indicated that improvement occurred with use of both products but there was no statistically significant difference between them.