Journal of Cytology
Home About us Ahead of print Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online:2150
  Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 32  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 261-267

Conjunctival impression cytology versus routine tear function tests for dry eye evaluation in contact lens wearers

1 Department of Pathology, School of Medical Sciences and Research, Sharda University, Greater Noida, India
2 Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medical Sciences and Research, Sharda University, Greater Noida, India
3 Department of Ophthalmology, Laser Eye Clinic, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
4 Department of Microbiology, Narayan Medical College and Hospital, Sasaram, Bihar, India

Correspondence Address:
Rahul Bhargava
B2/004, Ananda Apartments, Sector - 48, Noida - 201 301, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-9371.171242

Rights and Permissions

Aims: Prolonged contact lens wear is often accompanied by dryness of the eyes. The aim of this study was to compare conjunctival impression cytology (CIC) and tear film tests such as tear film break up time (TBUT) and Schirmer test for dry eye evaluation in contact lens wearers and measure their correlation with dry eye symptoms. Setting: A case control study was done at three referral eye centers. Materials and Methods: The eyes of 230 contact lens users were compared to 250 eyes of age- and sex-matched controls. Participants were recruited based on their response to a questionnaire of dry eye symptoms, (Dry Eye Scoring System, DESS © ) and measurements of TBUT, Schirmer test, and CIC was done. A correlation analysis between symptom severity and tear film tests was performed. Pearson's coefficient, R 2 > 0.5 was considered significant. Results: As compared to controls (r2 = 0.010), Nelson grade correlated significantly with dry eye symptoms (r2 = 0.765), among cases. However, there was moderate correlation between dry eye symptoms, Schirmer test, and TBUT (r2 = 0.557 and 0.530, respectively) among cases and a weak correlation among controls (r2 = 0.130 and 0.054, respectively). The sensitivity of TBUT was 86.4%, specificity was 82.4%, positive likelihood ratio (LR) was 4.50 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.46-5.85)], and negative LR was 0.09. The sensitivity of the Schirmer test was 48.2%, specificity 88%, LR 2.12 (95% CI 1.48-2.96), and negative LR 0.83. Conclusion: CIC correlates better than Schirmer and TBUT with dry eye symptoms. It may be the most appropriate test for dry-eye evaluation in contact lens wearers.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded232    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal