Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The use of photobiomodulation or low-level light therapy (LLLT) in the ophthalmic field stemmed from dermatology which has shown impact on skin blood flow and regeneration. There has been a rise in clinical interest with emerging evidence in the benefits of photobiomodulation in managing chronic inflammatory conditions such as dry eye disease including improvements in ocular discomfort symptoms, tear film stability and tear volume. Despite the observed clinical benefits, limited research has been done to compare photobiomodulation utilising different wavelengths, as most research on dry eye disease has focused on red wavelengths. It has been purported that blue wavelengths may disrupt microbial growth while red wavelengths stimulate energy production and hence increase heat in the affected tissues, although research into these differential impacts at the ocular surface and external eye has been limited. Hence, the aim of this exploratory clinical trial is to compare the impact of using LLLT incorporating red versus blue wavelengths on eyelid haemodynamics and microbiome, as well as conventional ocular surface measures of patients with dry eye disease and blepharitis (inflammation of the eyelids).
Participants with dry eye disease, oil gland disruption and blepharitis will receive 3 treatments with these LLLT, each separted by 1 week apart, and followed up to 1 month after the final treatment session. Participants will be randomised to either of 3 groups: Red light only group, Red + Blue light group, or a sham treatment group.
This study will be a randomized, double-masked, exploratory clinical study to assess the potential difference in impact between the two wavelengths used for LLLT. The whole study involves a total of 4 visits (consisting of 3 treatment visits, and 1 follow-up visit). All visits will be conducted at the Aston Dry Eye Clinic in Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red light only group | Active Comparator | LLLT will be administered using the Espansione Group Ltd Eye-light unit. LLLT consisting of a wearable facial mask with red light emitting diodes (LEDs) is administered for 30 minutes. |
|
| Red plus blue light group | Experimental | LLLT consisting of a wearable facial mask with red LEDs is administered for 15 minutes, followed by a mask with blue LEDs for another 15 minutes. |
|
| Sham treatment group | Sham Comparator | Sham treatment will be administered by using facial mask with red LEDs emitting at less than 10% fluence power output for 15 minutes, followed by a mask with blue LEDs emitting at less than 10% fluence power output for another 15 minutes. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red LLLT | Device | Mask with LEDs emitting at wavelengths of 633nm to facial and eyelids region with their eyes closed |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change from Baseline in Bacterial Colony to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of number of bacterial colonisation obtained from eyelid swabs | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change from Baseline in Visual Acuity to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective measure of visual acuity using Logarithm of the Minimum Angle Resolution (logMAR) scoring, ranging from -0.30 which signify the ability to be able to resolve the smallest letters, to 1.00 which signify the ability to resolve only the largest letters | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| James S Wolffsohn, PhD | Contact | +441212044400 | 3934 | j.chiang@aston.ac.uk |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| James S Wolffsohn, PhD | Aston University | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Auckland | Recruiting | Auckland | New Zealand |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21450918 | Background | Tomlinson A, Bron AJ, Korb DR, Amano S, Paugh JR, Pearce EI, Yee R, Yokoi N, Arita R, Dogru M. The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: report of the diagnosis subcommittee. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 Mar 30;52(4):2006-49. doi: 10.1167/iovs.10-6997f. Print 2011 Mar. No abstract available. | |
| 23108007 | Background |
Not provided
Not provided
Deidentified datasets will be available upon request.
Not provided
Deidentified datasets will be available upon request.
Deidentified datasets will be available upon request.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D015352 | Dry Eye Syndromes |
| D000080343 | Meibomian Gland Dysfunction |
| D001762 | Blepharitis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007766 | Lacrimal Apparatus Diseases |
| D005128 | Eye Diseases |
| D005141 | Eyelid Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Each participant is randomised to either of 3 groups: Red light only group, red plus blue light group, or sham treatment group.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Blue LLLT | Device | Mask with LEDs emitting at wavelengths of 428nm to facial and eyelid regions with their eyes closed |
|
| Sham Red LLLT | Device | Mask with LEDs emitting at wavelengths of 633nm, but with <10% fluence power output, to facial and eyelids region with their eyes closed |
|
| Sham Blue LLLT | Device | Mask with LEDs emitting at wavelengths of 428nm, but with <10% fluence power output, to facial and eyelids region with their eyes closed |
|
| Change from Baseline in Non-invasive Tear Break Up Time to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of the stability of tears and how fast the tears evaporate in seconds using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. An average of 3 measurements is obtained. | Baseline and 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Blink Rate to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Manual subjective count of the number of blinks using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Tear Meniscus Height to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of the volume of tears in mm using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. An average of 3 measurements is obtained. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Lipid Layer Pattern Grading to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the appearance of the lipid layer pattern as a surrogate measure of its thickness using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. This ranges from Grade 1 indicating very thin lipid layer to Grade 6 indicating very thick lipid layer. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperaemia to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Automated objective grading of the bulbar conjunctival redness using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. This ranges from Grade 0 indicating no redness to Grade 4 indicating substantial redness. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Limbal Conjunctival Hyperaemia to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Automated objective grading of the limbal conjunctival redness using the Oculus Keratograph 5M instrument. This ranges from Grade 0 indicating no redness to Grade 4 indicating substantial redness. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Blood Flow to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of blood flow using laser doppler flowmetry instrument. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Saponification Grading to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of saponification on a scale of 0 (no saponification) to 3 (severe saponification) | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Demodex Presence to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective assessment of the amount of Demodex present at the base of the lashes using slit lamp biomicroscopy and white light illumination. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Number of Blocked or Capped Meibomian Glands to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective assessment of the number of blocked or capped Meibomian Glands using slit lamp biomicroscopy and white light illumination. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Lid Margin Telangiectasia Grading to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the amount of telangiectasia at the lid margins using slit lamp biomicroscopy and white light illumination. This grading ranges from 0 with no telangiectasia to 3 with severe telangiectasia. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Meibum Expressibility to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of meibum expressibility of lower eyelids using slit lamp biomicroscopy and white light illumination. This grading ranges from 0 with all glands being expressible to 3 with no glands being expressible. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Meibum Quality to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of meibum quality of lower eyelids using slit lamp biomicroscopy and white light illumination. This grading ranges from 0 with clear fluid being expressed to 3 with inspissated toothpaste-like expression. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Fluorescein Corneal Staining to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the amount of corneal staining using fluorescein instillation, cobalt blue light illumination and the Oxford grading scale. This ranges from 0 with no staining to 5 with intense staining. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Bulbar Conjunctival Staining to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the amount of bulbar conjunctival staining using fluorescein and lissamine green instillation, white light illumination and the Oxford grading scale. This ranges from 0 with no staining to 5 with intense staining. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Lissamine Green Lid Wiper Epitheliopathy to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the amount of lid wiper epitheliopathy using lissamine green instillation and white light illumination. This grading ranges from 0 with no lid wiper epitheliopathy to 4 with severe lid wiper epitheliopathy. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in Meibography Meiboscore to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Subjective grading of the amount of Meibomian gland loss using infrared imaging and the Pult meiboscore. This grading ranges from 0 with no gland loss to 4 with severe gland loss (Pult and Reide-Pult, 2013). | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in MMP-9 Tear Concentration to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of matrix metalloproteinase-9 concentration in tears collected with a capillary and measured with a rapid immunoassay test. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Change from Baseline in LTA Tear Concentration to the Final Follow-up 1 Month After Final Treatment Session | Measure of lymphotoxin-A in tears collected with a capillary and measured with a rapid immunoassay test. | Baseline up to 1 month after final treatment session |
| Aston Dry Eye Clinic | Completed | Birmingham | West Midlands | B4 7ET | United Kingdom |
| Pult H, Riede-Pult B. Comparison of subjective grading and objective assessment in meibography. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2013 Feb;36(1):22-7. doi: 10.1016/j.clae.2012.10.074. Epub 2012 Oct 27. |
| 28736342 | Background | Wolffsohn JS, Arita R, Chalmers R, Djalilian A, Dogru M, Dumbleton K, Gupta PK, Karpecki P, Lazreg S, Pult H, Sullivan BD, Tomlinson A, Tong L, Villani E, Yoon KC, Jones L, Craig JP. TFOS DEWS II Diagnostic Methodology report. Ocul Surf. 2017 Jul;15(3):539-574. doi: 10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.001. Epub 2017 Jul 20. |
| 10815152 | Background | Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G, Hirsch JD, Reis BL. Reliability and validity of the Ocular Surface Disease Index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000 May;118(5):615-21. doi: 10.1001/archopht.118.5.615. |
| 20093066 | Background | Chalmers RL, Begley CG, Caffery B. Validation of the 5-Item Dry Eye Questionnaire (DEQ-5): Discrimination across self-assessed severity and aqueous tear deficient dry eye diagnoses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2010 Apr;33(2):55-60. doi: 10.1016/j.clae.2009.12.010. Epub 2010 Jan 25. |
| 27345733 | Background | Arita R, Minoura I, Morishige N, Shirakawa R, Fukuoka S, Asai K, Goto T, Imanaka T, Nakamura M. Development of Definitive and Reliable Grading Scales for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Sep;169:125-137. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.06.025. Epub 2016 Jun 23. |