CLINICAL TRIALS
Background
Clinical trials are conducted in order to create a fair and balanced way of testing a product's performance. Before launching the Unity® BioSync™ with HydraMist™ contact lenses, we contracted an independent research consultant to conduct a multi-center, masked, randomized, cross-over clinical trial.
Study Objectives
The purpose of the clinical trial was to compare the short-term clinical performance and wearer and practitioner acceptability of spherical Unity BioSync with HydraMist daily disposable contact lenses in comparison with the subjects’ habitual daily disposable contact lenses and a series of comparative daily disposable contact lenses.
Conclusions and Takeaways
In a group of 70 subjects, the Unity BioSync with HydraMist daily disposable contact lenses performed well when compared to both the subjects’ habitual contact lenses and the comparative lenses that were worn during the study period. There were no statistically significant differences in lens preference, subjective comfort, dryness, wettability or lens fit. Visual acuity was good, and no clinically relevant differences were observed in biomicroscopic responses.
Clinical trials are conducted in order to create a fair and balanced way of testing a product's performance. Before launching the Unity® BioSync™ with HydraMist™ contact lenses, we contracted an independent research consultant to conduct a multi-center, masked, randomized, cross-over clinical trial.
Study Objectives
The purpose of the clinical trial was to compare the short-term clinical performance and wearer and practitioner acceptability of spherical Unity BioSync with HydraMist daily disposable contact lenses in comparison with the subjects’ habitual daily disposable contact lenses and a series of comparative daily disposable contact lenses.
Conclusions and Takeaways
In a group of 70 subjects, the Unity BioSync with HydraMist daily disposable contact lenses performed well when compared to both the subjects’ habitual contact lenses and the comparative lenses that were worn during the study period. There were no statistically significant differences in lens preference, subjective comfort, dryness, wettability or lens fit. Visual acuity was good, and no clinically relevant differences were observed in biomicroscopic responses.
