Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33606837›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Compressive behaviour of soft contact lenses and its effect on refractive power on the eye and handling off the eye.

Ahmad H Shihab, Ashkan Eliasy, Bernardo T Lopes, Richard Wu, Lynn White, Steve Jones, Brendan Geraghty, Akram Joda, Ahmed Elsheikh, Ahmed Abass

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.

Ahmad H ShihabDepartment of Mechanical, Materials and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6956-2955
Ashkan EliasyDepartment of Civil Engineering and Industrial Design, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Bernardo T LopesDepartment of Civil Engineering and Industrial Design, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Richard WuDepartment of Optometry, Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taichung, Taiwan.
Lynn WhiteR&D Department, UltraVision CLPL, Leighton Buzzard, United Kingdom.
Steve JonesDepartment of Civil Engineering and Industrial Design, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Brendan GeraghtyInstitute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Akram JodaDepartment of Mechanical, Materials and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Ahmed ElsheikhDepartment of Mechanical, Materials and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Ahmed AbassDepartment of Mechanical, Materials and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8622-4632
University of Liverpool · GBCentral Taiwan University of Science and Technology · TWHigher Colleges of Technology · AEMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the stress-strain behaviour of 9 soft contact lens materials, that are commonly used in the market, under uniaxial compression loading.

methodsSeven types of hydrogel and two types of silicone-hydrogel soft contact lens materials were hydrated in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution then subjected to uniaxial compression loads. The load rate was set to 16.0 N/min starting with two consecutive initial 5.0 N loading cycles followed by three relaxation periods of 4.0 min within which there were two more 5.0 N loading cycles and eventually, a full loading cycle that stopped at a load of 49.0 N. The load and contraction data obtained experimentally were analysed to derive the stress-strain behaviour. Finite Element (FE) analysis was then utilised to evaluate the performance of soft contact lenses on the human eye and handling lenses off the eye.

resultsUnlike tensile tests, all tested materials showed nonlinear behaviour when tested under compression. When fitted to first-order Ogden hyperelastic model, parameter μ was found to be varying in the range 0.12 to 0.74 MPa and material parameter α was found to be varying in the range 8.2 to 20.326 among the nine tested materials. Compression modulus of elasticity was 2.2 times higher than the tensile modulus of elasticity on average. FE simulation with nonlinear Ogden constitutive model showed a limited change (8%~12%) in the optical performance when compared to other material models, however, it predicted higher stress when the lens was simulated under bending during off-eye handling.

conclusionsCompression tests revealed slightly nonlinear behaviour when materials were strained under compression stress down to 15% ~ 30% of their nominal heights. Considering the physiological compression loading range of 8 mmHg, secant moduli of elasticity were 1.5% to 6.9% higher than the tension moduli of elasticity depending on the material. Tensile-based moduli of elasticity could be used in FE analysis as a step towards simulating the optical performance of soft contact lenses on-eye. However, nonlinear compression-based material models are recommended for FE analysis of soft contact lenses when lens-handling is investigated off-eye.

Indexed as

Contact Lenses, HydrophilicElasticityFinite Element AnalysisHumansHydrogelsPressureRefraction, OcularHydrogels

Identifiers

PMID33606837
PMCPMC7895393
OpenAlexW3129396541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.