ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Microbial Contamination of Preservative-Free Artificial Tears Based on Instillation Techniques.
Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contamination Rates and Economic Evaluation of Reusing Medicated, Preservative-Free, Single-Use Eye Drops.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of contamination in preservative-free multi-dose Brimonidine eye drops: a comparative study.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Microbiological Contamination of Medicinal Products -Is It a Significant Problem?Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preservative-free artificial tears eliminate the side effects of preservatives but are prone to microbial contamination. This study evaluates the incidence of microbial contaminations in single-use vials of preservative-free 0.1% hyaluronate artificial tears. Based on what touched the vial tip during its first use, 60 unit-dose vials (0.5 mL) were divided into groups A (no touch, n = 20), B (fingertip, n = 20), and C (lid margin, n = 20). The vials were recapped after the first use, and the residual solution was cultured 24 h later. The solution from 20 aseptically opened and unused vials was also cultured (group D). Microbial contamination rates were compared between the groups using the Fisher's exact test. Groups B and C contained 45% (9/20) and 10% (2/20) contaminations while groups A and D contained undetected microbial growth. The culture positivity rates were significantly different between groups A and B (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.