Assessment of the mechanical forces applied during eye rubbing.

Corneal biomechanics Eye rubbing Keratoconus

Journal

BMC ophthalmology
ISSN: 1471-2415
Titre abrégé: BMC Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967802

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Jul 2020
Historique:
received: 04 03 2020
accepted: 06 07 2020
entrez: 24 7 2020
pubmed: 24 7 2020
medline: 15 5 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

To determine the average amount of mechanical forces applied to the lids of keratoconus patients during eye rubbing. Fifty-seven patients (41 male, 16 female, average age 34.8 years) with a clinically and topographically diagnosed keratoconus and a history of eye rubbing were prospectively asked to perform their individual eye rubbing movement on a high-precision balance. The type of eye-rubbing movement and the force applied, represented in newtons (N), were recorded and analyzed. We detected three different types of eye rubbing. Rubbing with the fingertip was most frequent (51%), followed by rubbing with the knuckle (44%) and rubbing with the fingernail (6%). Each type of eye rubbing showed different average forces, with knuckle type eye rubbing applying significantly more force (9.6 ± 6.3 N) on the lids than fingertip (4.3 ± 3.1 N) and fingernail (2.6 ± 3.3 N) types (p < 0,001 and p = 0,016, respectively). There were major variations in the force exerted on the lids, depending on the type of eye rubbing employed. This data will help determine the forces that need to be applied in future experimental eye rubbing models.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
To determine the average amount of mechanical forces applied to the lids of keratoconus patients during eye rubbing.
METHODS METHODS
Fifty-seven patients (41 male, 16 female, average age 34.8 years) with a clinically and topographically diagnosed keratoconus and a history of eye rubbing were prospectively asked to perform their individual eye rubbing movement on a high-precision balance. The type of eye-rubbing movement and the force applied, represented in newtons (N), were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS RESULTS
We detected three different types of eye rubbing. Rubbing with the fingertip was most frequent (51%), followed by rubbing with the knuckle (44%) and rubbing with the fingernail (6%). Each type of eye rubbing showed different average forces, with knuckle type eye rubbing applying significantly more force (9.6 ± 6.3 N) on the lids than fingertip (4.3 ± 3.1 N) and fingernail (2.6 ± 3.3 N) types (p < 0,001 and p = 0,016, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
There were major variations in the force exerted on the lids, depending on the type of eye rubbing employed. This data will help determine the forces that need to be applied in future experimental eye rubbing models.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32698803
doi: 10.1186/s12886-020-01551-5
pii: 10.1186/s12886-020-01551-5
pmc: PMC7374951
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

301

Références

Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol. 2012 Spring;1(1):14-7
pubmed: 24600612
Br J Ophthalmol. 1971 Jan;55(1):50-4
pubmed: 4251642
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Sep 1;136(9):971-978
pubmed: 29931124
Cornea. 2016 Nov;35(11):1416-1420
pubmed: 27429082
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013 Aug;61(8):407-9
pubmed: 23925324
Clin Exp Optom. 2016 Jul;99(4):366-72
pubmed: 27306478
Can J Ophthalmol. 2011 Feb;46(1):83-6
pubmed: 21283164
Surv Ophthalmol. 1998 Jan-Feb;42(4):297-319
pubmed: 9493273
Br J Ophthalmol. 2018 Oct;102(10):1436-1441
pubmed: 29298777
Cornea. 2017 Jan;36(1):e1
pubmed: 27755195
Oman J Ophthalmol. 2016 Sep-Dec;9(3):170-173
pubmed: 27843234
Am J Ophthalmol. 1986 Mar 15;101(3):267-73
pubmed: 3513592

Auteurs

Farhad Hafezi (F)

Laboratory for Ocular Cell Biology, Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. farhad@hafezi.ch.
ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland. farhad@hafezi.ch.
USC Roski Eye Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. farhad@hafezi.ch.
Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. farhad@hafezi.ch.
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Wenzhou, Wenzhou, China. farhad@hafezi.ch.

Nikki L Hafezi (NL)

ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland.

Bojan Pajic (B)

Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
ORASIS Eye Clinic, Swiss Eye Research Foundation, Reinach, Switzerland.
Department of Physics, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia.
Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical academy, University of Defense, Belgrade, Serbia.

Francesca Gilardoni (F)

Laboratory for Ocular Cell Biology, Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland.

J Bradley Randleman (JB)

The Cleveland Clinic, Clevelan, OH, USA.

Jose Alvaro P Gomes (JAP)

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Paulista School of Medicine, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Léonard Kollros (L)

ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland.

Mark Hillen (M)

ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland.

Emilio A Torres-Netto (EA)

Laboratory for Ocular Cell Biology, Center for Applied Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
ELZA Institute, Dietikon, Switzerland.
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Paulista School of Medicine, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH