This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Economical use of artificial tears may influence contamination risk, study warns
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
The angle of application influences the drop size of artificial tears, potentially affecting the economics of chronic treatment, according to a study. Smaller drops may prolong the use of a single bottle, increasing the risk of potential contamination.
Robert W. Enzenauer, MD, MPH, and colleagues at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine compared preserved artificial tear samples from eight manufacturers to determine which is the least costly chronic treatment of mild dry eye.
According to the study, measured total bottle volume averaged 3.5% more than the volume stated on the products’ labels.
Each sample produced a smaller drop when the bottle was held at a 45· angle from horizontal, as compared to a 90· angle. At a 45· angle, Natural Tears Formula by Murine and Artificial Tears by Heath Pride produced the smallest drops, less than 0.03 g. This is also closest to the volume of the lacrimal lake, the authors wrote. Natural Tears Formula (Murine) was also found to be the least expensive product, with a treatment cost per year of approximately $11.29.
The authors noted that cost comparison of artificial tears is important because the least expensive artificial tear treatments may require prolonged use of the same bottle, leading to greater potential for contamination over time.