24-Hour Intraocular Pressure Rhythm in Young Healthy Subjects Evaluated With Continuous Monitoring Using a Contact Lens Sensor
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: This study evaluates a new device that has been proposed to continuously monitor intraocular pressure (IOP) over 24 hours. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 24-hour IOP rhythm reproducibility during repeated continuous 24-hour IOP monitoring with noncontact tonometry (NCT) and a contact lens sensor (CLS) in healthy participants. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study of 12 young healthy volunteers at a referral center of chronobiology. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were housed in a sleep laboratory and underwent four 24-hour sessions of IOP measurements over a 6-month period. After initial randomized attribution, the IOP of the first eye was continuously monitored using a CLS and the IOP of the fellow eye was measured hourly using NCT. Two sessions with NCT measurements in 1 eye and CLS measurements in the fellow eye, 1 session with CLS measurements in only 1 eye, and 1 session with NCT measurements in both eyes were performed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A nonlinear least squares, dual-harmonic regression analysis was used to model the 24-hour IOP rhythm. Comparison of acrophase, bathyphase, amplitude, midline estimating statistic of rhythm, IOP values, IOP changes, and agreement were evaluated in the 3 tonometry methods. RESULTS: A significant nyctohemeral IOP rhythm was found in 31 of 36 sessions (86%) using NCT and in all sessions (100%) using CLS. Hourly awakening during NCT IOP measurements did not significantly change the mean phases of the 24-hour IOP pattern evaluated using CLS in the contralateral eye. Throughout the sessions, intraclass correlation coefficients of the CLS acrophase (0.6 [95% CI, 0.0 to 0.9]; P = .03), CLS bathyphase (0.7 [95% CI, 0.1 to 0.9]; P = .01), NCT amplitude (0.7 [95% CI, 0.1 to 0.9]; P = .01), and NCT midline estimating statistic of rhythm (0.9 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.0]; P < .01) were significant. When performing NCT measurements in 1 eye and CLS measurements in the contralateral eye, the IOP change at each point normalized from the first measurement (9 am) was not symmetric individually or within the population. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The CLS is an accurate and reproducible method to characterize the nyctohemeral IOP rhythm in healthy participants but does not allow for estimating the IOP value in millimeters of mercury corresponding to the relative variation of the electrical signal measured.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other electrochemical sensors embedded in contact lenses were utilized to quantify lactate concentration in 35 s with 53 μA mm−1 resolution.
“Other electrochemical sensors embedded in contact lenses were utilized to quantify lactate concentration in 35 s with 53 µA mm −1 resolution.65”
From Wearables in Medicine (2018) · cites this paper as [65]
Cites
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 23,433 · see citing works
First steps toward noninvasive intraocular pressure monitoring with a sensing contact lens
Leonardi, M., Leuenberger, P., Bertrand, D., Bertsch, A., & Renaud, P. (2004) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.04-0015 · Cited by 244 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Yetisen, A. K., Martinez‐Hurtado, J. L., Ünal, B., Khademhosseini, A., & Butt, H. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201706910 · Cited by 569 · see citing works
Contact Lens Sensors in Ocular Diagnostics
Farandos, N. M., Yetisen, A. K., Monteiro, M. J., Lowe, C. R., & Yun, S. H. (2015) · Advanced Healthcare Materials · doi:10.1002/adhm.201400504 · Cited by 466 · see citing works
Noninvasive intraocular pressure monitoring: Current insights
De Smedt, S. (2015) · Clinical ophthalmology · doi:10.2147/opth.s53772 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mottet, B., Aptel, F., Romanet, J.-P., Hubanova, R., Pépin, J.-L., & Chiquet, C.
- Affiliations
- Inserm (FR)
- Université Joseph Fourier (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Aptel, Florent
- Venue
- JAMA Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2013-12-01
- Volume
- 131
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1507
- ISSN
- 2168-6165 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2000111502
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 12
- FWCI
- 11.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Glaucoma and retinal disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ocular Surface and Contact Lens
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
- Keywords
- intraocular pressure, contact lens sensor, non-contact tonometry, nyctohemeral rhythm, acrophase, measurement agreement, healthy young adults, chronobiology, sleep laboratory, contralateral eye comparison, device validation
- MeSH terms
- Circadian Rhythm, Contact Lenses, Equipment Design, Female, Humans, Intraocular Pressure, Male, Prospective Studies, Reference Values, Telemetry, Tonometry, Ocular, Reproducibility of Results, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review