Artificial tears potpourri: A literature review

102Citations
Citations of this article
174Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Numerous brands and types of artificial tears are available on the market for the treatment of dysfunctional tear syndrome. Past literature has focused on comparing the components of these products on patient's clinical improvement. The wide array of products on the market presents challenges to both clinicians and patients when trying to choose between available tear replacement therapies. Different formulations affect patients based on etiology and severity of disease. In order to provide an unbiased comparison between available tear replacement therapies, we conducted a literature review of existing studies and National Institutes of Health clinical trials on commercially available, brand name artificial tears. Outcomes evaluated in each study, as well as the percent of patients showing clinical and symptomatic improvement, were analyzed. Fifty-one studies evaluating different brands of artificial tears, and their efficacy were identified. Out of the 51 studies, 18 were comparison studies testing brand name artificial tears directly against each other. Nearly all formulations of artificial tears provided significant benefit to patients with dysfunctional tear syndrome, but some proved superior to others. From the study data, a recommended treatment flowchart was derived. © 2014 Moshirfar et al.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Moshirfar, M., Pierson, K., Hanamaikai, K., Santiago-Caban, L., Muthappan, V., & Passi, S. F. (2014, July 31). Artificial tears potpourri: A literature review. Clinical Ophthalmology. Dove Medical Press Ltd. https://doi.org/10.2147/opth.s65263

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free