Subjects with dry eye experience significant diurnal variations of visual function and ocular surface physiology. These daily rhythms should be considered when designing clinical trials and when quantifying disease severity.

PurposeOur aim was to extend the concept of blink patterns from average interblink interval (IBI) to other aspects of the distribution of IBI. We hypothesized that this more comprehensive approach would better discriminate between normal and dry eye subjects.MethodsBlinks were captured over 10 minutes for ten normal and ten dry eye subjects while viewing a standardized televised documentary. Fifty-five blinks were analyzed for each of the 20 subjects. Means, standard deviations, and autocorrelation coefficients were calculated utilizing a single random effects model fit to all data points and a diagnostic model was subsequently fit to predict probability of a subject having dry eye based on these parameters.ResultsMean IBI was 5.97 seconds for normal versus 2.56 seconds for dry eye subjects (ratio: 2.33, P = 0.004). IBI variability was 1.56 times higher in normal subjects (P < 0.001), and the autocorrelation was 1.79 times higher in normal subjects (P = 0.044). With regard to the diagnostic power of these measures, mean IBI was the best dry eye versus normal classifier using receiver operating characteristics (0.85 area under curve (AUC)), followed by the standard deviation (0.75 AUC), and lastly, the autocorrelation (0.63 AUC). All three predictors combined had an AUC of 0.89. Based on this analysis, cutoffs of ≤3.05 seconds for median IBI, and ≤0.73 for the coefficient of variation were chosen to classify dry eye subjects.Conclusion(1) IBI was significantly shorter for dry eye patients performing a visual task compared to normals; (2) there was a greater variability of interblink intervals in normal subjects; and (3) these parameters were useful as diagnostic predictors of dry eye disease. The results of this pilot study merit investigation of IBI parameters on a larger scale study in subjects with dry eye and other ocular surface disorders.

Blink is a complex phenomenon that is profoundly affected by diverse endogenous and exogenous stimuli. It has been studied in the context of cognition, emotional, and psychological states, as an indicator of fatigue and sleepiness, particularly in the automobile and transportation industry, in visual tasking, and finally, as it relates to tear film stability and ocular surface health. The fact that it is highly variable and has input from so many sources makes it very difficult to study. In the present review, the behavior of blink in many of these systems is discussed, ultimately returning in each instance to a discussion of how these factors affect blink in the context of dry eyes. Blink is important to ocular surface health and to an individual's optimal functioning and quality of life. Disturbances in blink, as cause or effect, result in a breakdown of tear film stability, optical clarity, and visual function.

An objective, automated analysis of corneal staining provides a quality assurance tool to be used to substantiate clinical grading of key corneal staining endpoints in multicentered clinical trials of dry eye.

PurposeTo classify blinks in dry eye and normal subjects into six subtypes, and to define the blink rate and duration within each type of blink, as well as the total lid-contact time/minute.Materials and methodsThis was a single-centered, prospective, double-blind study of eleven dry-eye and ten normal subjects. Predefined subjects watched a video while blinks were recorded for 10 minutes. Partial blinks were classified by percentage closure of maximal palpebral fissure opening: 25%, 50%, 75%. Complete blinks were characterized as full (>0 seconds), extended (>0.1 seconds), or superextended (>0.5 seconds). The mean duration of each type of blink was determined and standardized per minute as total lid-contact time.ResultsTotal blinks observed were 4,990 (1,414 normal, 3,756 dry eye): 1,809 (50.59%) partial and 1,767 (49.41%) complete blinks among dry-eye subjects versus 741 (52.90%) partial and 673 (47.60%) complete blinks among normal subjects. Only superextended blinks of ≥0.5-second duration were significantly more frequent in dry-eye subjects than normals (2.3% versus 0.2%, respectively; P=0.023). Total contact time was seven times higher in dry-eye subjects than normals (0.565 versus 0.080 seconds, respectively; P<0.001). Isolating only extended blinks (>0.1 second), the average contact time (seconds) was four times longer in dry-eye versus normal subjects (2.459 in dry eye, 0.575 in normals; P=0.003). Isolating only superextended blinks (>0.5 seconds), average contact time was also significantly different (7.134 in dry eye, 1.589 in normals; P<0.001). The contact rate for all full closures was 6.4 times longer in dry-eye (0.045 versus 0.007, P<0.001) than normal subjects.ConclusionDry-eye subjects spent 4.5% of a minute with their eyes closed, while normal subjects spent 0.7% of a minute with their eyes closed. Contact time might play a role in the visual function decay associated with increased blink rates.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the occurrence and duration of extended blinks ≥ 70 msec and their associated interblink intervals in normal subjects and in subjects with mild to moderate dry eye.MethodsThis single-center, prospective, double-blind study included 11 subjects with dry eye and eight subjects with normal eyes. Extended blinks were defined as lid closure in at least two successive video frames (≥70 msec). Digital video imaging of each subject’s eyes was recorded while the subject viewed a 10-minute documentary. The subjects did not know that blink was the outcome being measured. Following capture, the videos were manually analyzed in a masked fashion for the occurrence of extended blinks. The length of the interblink interval (ie, time between blinks) before and after these extended blinks (the interblink interval ratio) was calculated, as well as differences in lid contact times.ResultsThe dry eye group had a median extended blink duration which was 2.53 times longer than that of the normal group. For subjects with dry eye, interblink intervals post-extended blink were significantly longer than interblink intervals pre-extended blink (P < 0.001). Interblink intervals did not lengthen significantly in normal subjects. In both groups, the duration of the extended blink was significantly (P = 0.001) and positively correlated with interblink interval ratio (post-extended to pre-extended blink interblink interval), such that for each doubling of extended blink duration, the interblink interval ratio increased by 10%. Blinks longer than one second in duration occurred almost exclusively in subjects with dry eye.ConclusionThis study reports three central findings: blink duration tended to be longer in subjects with dry eye; a lengthening of the interblink interval after an extended blink occurred in subjects with dry eye but not in those without dry eye; and a longer blink duration was associated with a significantly increased interblink interval ratio in all subjects.

PurposeThe Ocular Protection Index (OPI) 2.0 System was developed to evaluate ocular surface protection under a natural blink pattern and normal visual conditions. The OPI 2.0 System implements fully automated software algorithms which provide a real-time measurement of corneal exposure (breakup area) for each interblink interval during a 1-minute video. Utilizing this method, the mean breakup area (MBA) and OPI 2.0 (MBA/interblink interval) were calculated and analyzed. The purpose of this study was to verify and validate the OPI 2.0 System for its ability to distinguish between dry eye and normal subjects, and to accurately identify breakup area.MethodsIn order to verify and validate the OPI 2.0 System, a series of artificial images and a series of still image frames captured during an actual clinical session using fluorescein staining videography were analyzed. Finally, a clinical validation process was completed to determine the effectiveness and clinical relevance of the OPI 2.0 System to differentiate between dry eye and normal subjects.ResultsSoftware analysis verification conducted in a set of artificially constructed images and in actual videos both saw minimal error rates. MBA and OPI 2.0 calculations were able to distinguish between the qualifying eyes of dry eye and normal subjects in a statistically significant fashion (P < 0.001 for both outcomes). As expected, dry eye subjects had a higher MBA and OPI 2.0 than normal subjects (0.232, dry eye; 0.040, normal and 0.039, dry eye; 0.006, normal, respectively). Results for the worst eyes and all qualifying analyses based on staining, forced-stare tear film breakup time, and MBA were numerically similar.ConclusionThe OPI 2.0 System accurately identifies the degree of breakup area on the cornea and represents an efficient, clinically relevant measurement of the pathophysiology of the ocular surface.

PurposeTo evaluate a new method of measuring ocular exposure in the context of a natural blink pattern through analysis of the variables tear film breakup time (TFBUT), interblink interval (IBI), and tear film breakup area (BUA).MethodsThe traditional methodology (Forced-Stare [FS]) measures TFBUT and IBI separately. TFBUT is measured under forced-stare conditions by an examiner using a stopwatch, while IBI is measured as the subject watches television. The new methodology (video capture manual analysis [VCMA]) involves retrospective analysis of video data of fluorescein-stained eyes taken through a slit lamp while the subject watches television, and provides TFBUT and BUA for each IBI during the 1-minute video under natural blink conditions. The FS and VCMA methods were directly compared in the same set of dry-eye subjects. The VCMA method was evaluated for the ability to discriminate between dry-eye subjects and normal subjects. The VCMA method was further evaluated in the dry eye subjects for the ability to detect a treatment effect before, and 10 minutes after, bilateral instillation of an artificial tear solution.ResultsTen normal subjects and 17 dry-eye subjects were studied. In the dry-eye subjects, the two methods differed with respect to mean TFBUTs (5.82 seconds, FS; 3.98 seconds, VCMA; P = 0.002). The FS variables alone (TFBUT, IBI) were not able to successfully distinguish between the dry-eye and normal subjects, whereas the additional VCMA variables, both derived and observed (BUA, BUA/IBI, breakup rate), were able to successfully distinguish between the dry-eye and normal subjects in a statistically significant fashion. TFBUT (P = 0.034) and BUA/IBI (P = 0.001) were able to distinguish the treatment effect of artificial tears in dry-eye subjects.ConclusionThe VCMA methodology provides a clinically relevant analysis of tear film stability measured in the context of a natural blink pattern.