USB-powered vs. self-heating warm compresses for meibomian gland dysfunction: A prospective randomized crossover clinical trial.
Ali M Al Saqr, Moath Faisal Alharbi, Meshary Alrumizan et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This prospective randomized crossover trial compared USB-powered and self-heating warm compresses in 15 adults aged 18–40 years with meibomian gland dysfunction and tear break-up time ≤10 s. Each device was used for five consecutive days, with a two-week washout between phases. Across observed visits, USB-powered compresses were associated with higher tear break-up time (likelihood-ratio χ2(1) = 7.43, p = 0.006) and tear meniscus height (χ2(1) = 4.49, p = 0.034). Day 5 mean tear break-up time was 9.53 ± 2.18 s versus 7.21 ± 2.90 s, respectively; symptom scores did not differ significantly.
Key findings
- Across observed visits, tear break-up time was higher with USB-powered compresses (likelihood-ratio χ2(1) = 7.43, p = 0.006).
- Tear meniscus height was higher with USB-powered compresses (χ2(1) = 4.49, p = 0.034).
- On day 5, mean tear break-up time was 9.53 ± 2.18 s with USB-powered compresses and 7.21 ± 2.90 s with self-heating masks.
- Symptom scores showed no significant between-device difference, and no adverse events were reported.
Why it matters
Warm compresses are commonly used to support lipid-layer function in meibomian gland dysfunction. This small crossover trial suggests that device choice may affect objective tear-film measures, while symptom scores did not significantly differ. The findings add comparative evidence for two home-use approaches, but the short treatment phases and limited participant group mean the results should be interpreted cautiously.
What to keep in mind
The trial included only 15 participants aged 18–40 years, and each device was used for five days; the abstract notes that larger trials are needed.