Abstract
Purpose
Diabetes is a major cause of ocular morbidity as multiple mechanisms play a role in inducing inflammatory changes in the eye. Diabetic retinopathy is the most common complication and is well-documented. However, in the era of modern medicine, attention is also being focused on ocular surface changes in diabetes. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the association between diabetes and ocular surface diseases.
Materials and Methods
This is a cross-sectional study examining 320 eyes of 160 patients with diabetes who were grouped according to their duration of diabetes. The symptoms were evaluated using the ocular surface disease index (OSDI) questionnaire. Their recent hemoglobin (Hb) A1c value was recorded. Their external or internal hordeolum, blepharitis, meibomian gland dysfunction, and corneal sensitivity were also evaluated. The tear film was examined using tests, such as Schirmer's test, tear film breakup time (TBUT), tear film meniscus height (TFMH), fluorescein stain, and rose bengal stain. The results were correlated with the duration and control of diabetes.
Results
The mean age of the study population was 56.60 years comprising 56% (n=89) females and 44% (n=71) males. The mean OSDI scores were 7.9 ± 3.55 and 57 ± 19.22 in patients without dry eye and with severe dry eye, respectively. The study observed OSDI scores were consistently high with diabetes severity. About 67% (n=24) of patients with HbA1c of >8% had dry eyes. Dry eye was found in 68% (n=59) of patients with the duration of diabetes being >10 years. About 23.7% (n=38) had blepharitis, whereas only 4% (n=7) had external or internal hordeolum and 44% (n=86) had different grades of meibomian gland dysfunction. Corneal sensitivity was abnormal in only 12% (n=12) of patients. About 55% (n=86) of patients had varying degrees of dry eye. A statistically significant correlation was found between the severity of dry eye and TBUT, TFMH values, and grades of corneal staining (P < 0.0001).
Conclusion
This study observed that the incidence of dry eyes was found to be higher when patients had uncontrolled diabetes and diabetes for a longer period. The OSDI scoring system is an important diagnostic tool while examining patients with dry eye. In an ophthalmology clinic, patients with diabetes should always be evaluated for any ocular surface changes when being screened for diabetic retinopathy, and proper guidelines should be implemented to detect changes in the ocular surface system as early as possible so that any long-term complications such as infectious or neurotrophic keratitis may be avoided at an early stage.
Keywords: glycated hemoglobin (hba1c), osdi scoring system, meibomian gland disorders, dry eye, tear film
Introduction
Next to China, India has 69.2 million patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), the second-highest number worldwide [1]. According to reports, DM levels are estimated to be 12% to 15% in India [2]. Among people aged between 20 to 70 years, DM is one of the major causes of preventable blindness. A person with blindness caused by DM may experience complications such as neuropathy, retinopathy, nephropathy, and cardiovascular disorders [3]. As for the eye, diabetic retinopathy has been well studied and documented. However, ocular surface diseases in DM have gained some significance as it hampers patients’ quality of life [3].
“The ocular surface complex” is defined as the ocular surface, including the corneal surface with its epithelium, conjunctiva, and its superficial layers and the ocular adnexal system containing the lacrimal, meibomian gland, and eyelashes, among others, and eyelid with its blinking mechanism. The diseases associated with these structures are known as “ocular surface diseases” [4]. Among the ocular surface diseases, dry eye syndrome is the most common. Multiple mechanisms, such as ocular surface and lacrimal gland inflammation, neurotrophic deficiency, and meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), play significant roles. It had been suggested that one or more of the following initial events may lead to alterations described in the tear film and ocular surface of patients with DM: a) chronic hyperglycemia, b) corneal nerve damage, and c) impairment on insulin action [5].
In India, the prevalence of ocular surface diseases ranges from 17% to 69%. The reported percentages of ocular surface disorders and dry eye have been approximately 54% [6]. Ocular surface diseases in DM are quite common among patients with DM. However, understanding of symptoms is unfortunately lacking, and assessment errors result in many undiagnosed or undertreated patients. As most data on diabetic ocular surface disease are based on studies from Western Europe, and since DM incidence in India has been increasing, the pattern and knowledge in Indian populations should also be examined. Hence, this study is conducted with the Indian population in consideration.
Materials and methods
This cross-sectional study was conducted from September 2019 to September 2021 at Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital & Research Center, a tertiary care hospital in Pimpri, Pune, India. This study was conducted in the outpatient ophthalmology department that examined 320 eyes of 160 consecutive patients with DM regardless of their age, gender, duration of disease, and type of DM. Patients with pterygium and thyroid disease, those who used chronic ocular drugs such as anti-histamines (olopatadine, fexofenadine etc.), wore contact lenses, had corneal opacity due to trauma, or those who underwent ocular surgery in the past three months, and are on anti-depressants (citalopram, fluoxetine etc.), were excluded. Ethical committee clearance was obtained from the Institutional-Ethics Sub-committee at Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pimpri, Pune, India (Research Protocol No. IESC/PGS/2019/109). The study purpose was explained to all patients, and consent was obtained.
A detailed systemic illness history was taken. The best corrective visual acuity was noted. A recent result of the average sugar level with hemoglobin (Hb) A1c level was also recorded. Patients were evaluated after taking full history for symptoms, such as itching, dryness, grittiness, foreign body sensations, sticky eye discharges, redness, or any insensitivity to bright or low light using the ocular surface disease index (OSDI) questionnaire, and the total score was recorded. Detailed ocular examination was performed using slit-lamp examination with special attention given to the eyelash, eyelids, conjunctiva, and status of cornea. Eyelashes of both eyes were examined for any hard scales, crusting, dandruff-like scaling material, or presence of hyperemia of anterior lid margins. Eyelids were examined for any infections like external or internal hordeolum. The corneal sensations were checked using a cotton wisp. If instant blinking reflex was present, corneal sensations were noted as intact, and if the instant blink reflex was absent, then it was noted as abnormal corneal sensations.
The eyelids were also examined for the presence of any MGD by gently pressing the fingers on the lid margin to evaluate the expressed secretions for the expression and quality [7] (Table 1).
Table 1. The classification of meibomian glands based on quality and expressivity .
| Grades | Quality and expressivity of the meibomian glands |
| Grade 0 | Absence of any abnormality |
| Grade 1 | On lid margin compression, the presence of plugging with translucent serous secretion |
| Grade 2 | On lid margin compression, the presence of plugging with viscous or waxy white secretions |
| Grade 3 | On lid margin compression, absence of secretions |
To evaluate patients’ basic and reflex tearing, a Schirmer’s test I without using topical anesthesia was performed with the standardized no.41. Whatman filter paper. After asking the patient to look up, the strips were placed at the lower fornix at the junction of lateral one-third and medial two-thirds of the eyelid while ensuring that it was not touching the corneal surface. The strip was put in place for five minutes, and the wet distance was measured in millimetres (mm). A reading of >10 mm was considered normal tearing, whereas a reading of <10 mm was considered poor tearing. If poor tearing was observed on Schirmer’s test I, the test was repeated with nasal stimulation. If the reading is >5 mm, it was noted as good reflex tearing, whereas if the reading is <5 mm, it will be noted as abnormal reflex tearing [8,9].
The TFMH was measured using a slit lamp, and 0.3 mm was set as a cut-off, and if the noted measurement was <0.3 mm, it was considered abnormal. The TBUT was examined on the slit lamp using a fluorescein strip using topical anesthesia. Using a timer, the visualization of the first dry spot from the last blink was noted. A TBUT reading of <10 s was noted as abnormal [8,9].
The staining pattern of the cornea was evaluated using a fluorescein strip containing 1 mg of fluorescein sodium [10,11] (Table 2, 3).
Table 2. The classification of staining density of the corneal surface area .
| Grades | Staining of the corneal surface area |
| Grade 0 | No punctate staining |
| Grade 1 | Less than 1/3rd |
| Grade 2 | 1/3rd to 2/3rd |
| Grade 3 | >2/3rd |
Table 3. The classification of the staining density of the cornea.
| Grades | Staining density of the cornea |
| Grade 0 | Absence of punctate staining |
| Grade 1 | Representing sparse density |
| Grade 2 | Representing moderate density |
| Grade 3 | High-density overlapping regions |
Both eyes were stained with rose bengal strip containing 1.5 mg of Rose Bengal to evaluate the conjunctival staining pattern. The nasal and temporal parts of the conjunctiva were stained using the Rose Bengal strip and graded as indicated in previous studies [12] (Table 4). The total of these staining scores of >3 was noted irregular.
Table 4. The classification of conjunctival staining pattern.
| Grades | Conjunctival staining pattern [12] |
| Grade 1 | Absence of staining |
| Grade 2 | Staining of very few points |
| Grade 3 | Scattered staining pattern |
| Grade 4 | Confluent areas of the stained conjunctiva |
Statistical analysis
Data collected from the patients were coded and further tabulated. All data analyses were performed using Spearman’s rank correlation, Kruskal-Wallis tests and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) to find a statistical correlation between two variables.
Results
In the study, patients consisted of 56% (n=89) females and 44% (n=71) males. The mean age of patients was 56.60 years, predominantly consisting of patients aged >60 years. About 37% (n=60) of patients were >60 years, whereas 10% (n=15) were 30 to 40 years, 21% (n=33) were 41 to 50 years, and 32% (n=52) were 51 to 60 years. About 45% (n=72) of patients had no dry eye, whereas 55% (n=88) were diagnosed with dry eye. Around 39% [n=62] of patients had mild dryness of eyes, 9% (n=15) had moderate dryness, and 7% (n=7) had severe dry eyes.
In this study, 54% (n=86) of patients had been diagnosed with DM for five to 10 years, 14% (n=23) had it <2 years, 17% (n=17) had it between two to five years, and 15% (n=24) patients had it for >10 years. A significant positive correlation was observed using Spearman’s rank correlation with a p-value of 0.405 and P <0.0001 between the duration of DM and dry eye (Table 5).
Table 5. Association of the duration of diabetes with dry eye syndrome.
| Duration of diabetes | Number of patients | Percentage (%) | Dry eye (%) |
| <2 years | 23 | 14 % | 4% |
| 2–5 years | 27 | 17% | 7 % |
| 5–10 years | 86 | 54% | 21% |
| >10 years | 24 | 15% | 68% |
| Total | 160 |
In our study, 29% (n=47) patients had HbA1c level of <6.5%, whereas 30% (n=48) had 6.5% to 8%, and 41% (n=65) had >8%. Dry eyes were observed in 67% (n=59) of patients with an HbA1c level of >8 (Table 6). A significant positive correlation was observed between HbA1c level and dry eye using Spearman’s rank correlation with p-value of 0.510 and P <0.0001.
Table 6. Association of HbA1c level and dry eye.
| HbA1c level | % of patients with dry eye (n=88) |
| <6.5 | 7 |
| 6.5–8 | 24 |
| >8 | 67 |
The mean OSDI score was 7.9 ± 3.55 in patients without dry eyes, 21 ± 2.99 in mild dry eyes, 29 ± 2.89 in moderate dry eyes, and 57 ± 19.22 in severely dry eyes. Only seven of 160 patients had external or internal hordeolum, whereas 23.7% (n=38) of patients had blepharitis. In this study, 44% (n=71) patients had Grade 0 MGD; 39% (n=63) had Grade 1; 9% (n=14) had Grade 2; and 8% (n=12) had Grade 3. Comparing these results with dry eye, a statistically significant positive correlation was observed between the severity of dry eye and MGD grades (P < 0.0001 and p-value 0.340). Low Schimer’s test, TFMH test, and TBUT scores were noted. The study found the mean TFMH in patients with no dry eye to be 0.7 ± 1.96 mm, and 0.2 ± 1.38 mm in patients with dry eyes, suggesting a statistically highly significant correlation (using Kruskal-Walis test) with the severity of dry eye as compared to non-dry eye patients in the TFMH test (P < 0.0001).
The TBUT value was 14 ± 1.56 (s) and 8.92 ± 1.32 (s) in patients without and with dry eyes, respectively, suggesting a statistically highly significant correlation (Kruskal-Wallis test) with the severity of dry eye as compared to patients without dry eyes in the TBUT test (P < 0.001). The mean corneal staining grading was 0.64 ± 0.32 and 1.43 ± 0.87 in patients without and with dry eyes, respectively, which was observed to have a high statistical significance when correlated with the dry eye patients as compared to patients without dry eyes using the Kruskal-Wallis test (P < 0.0001).
In our study, the mean grading of corneal staining density was seen to have a statistically highly significant correlation using the Kruskal-Wallis test, with patients with dry eye (1.46 ± 0.21) as compared to patients without dry eyes (0.64 ± 0.69) (P < 0.0001). About 22% of patients had varying degrees of conjunctival staining: 11% (n=17) had Grade 1; 9% (n=14) had Grade 2; and only 2% (n=4) had Grade 3. In our study, 12% (n=20) of patients had abnormal corneal sensation, whereas 88% (n=140) of patients had intact.
Discussion
This study aimed to investigate the ocular surface disease in patients with DM. This study focused to find a positive correlation between ocular surface disorders and DM. Khetwani et al. reported that 148 of their 182 patients were aged >50 years [13]. Similarly, Sarkar et al. reported the mean age of patients was 54 ± 10.06 years with 43% aged between 40 and 50 years [14]. Acharlu et al. demonstrated that the mean age of patients with DM was 55.06 ± 9.70 (range 40-75) years [15]. Khetwani et al. [13] categorized their patients into multiple groups as per the duration of DM.
The calculated HbA1c value of the study showed that dry eyes were more common in patients with DM who had abnormal levels (52%) than in those with normal levels. A study conducted by Dutta et al. in Assam, India, observed a statistically significant correlation when comparing Schirmer’s score and the HbA1c level of each patient [16]. Sarkar et al.’s study in West Bengal, India, showed that DM management was highly statistically significant with dry eyes [14]. Patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c >8%) were found to have a higher degree of dry eyes. Kaiserman et al. [17] and Seifart et al. [18] reported a positive association between the DM control using HbA1c values and the dry eye syndrome.
A significant positive correlation was observed between the duration of DM and the occurrence of dry eyes. A similar observation was reported by He et al. [19], Yoon et al. [20], and Manaviat et al. [6]. The duration of DM was significantly associated with dry eyes (P = 0.01) according to Khetwani et al. [13] with statistical significance (P = 0.04). Nasar et al. [21] similarly observed a significant association of dry eyes with poor glycemic control (P < 0.001) and with a longer duration of DM (P < 0.05) in a study conducted in Tamil Nadu, India. Gannur et al. [22] in Vijaypura district, Karnataka, India, observed that dry eyes were more common in patients with five years of DM (a 2.65-fold increase). A highly statistically value of P < 0.001 was observed in patients with dry eyes who had uncontrolled DM.
In our present study, the mean OSDI score was 7.9 ± 3.55, 21 ± 2.99, 29 ± 2.89, and 57 ± 19.22 in patients without, mild, moderate, and severe dry eyes, respectively. The grades of dry eye were significantly associated with high OSDI scores. Fuerst et al. [23] reported a significant correlation between the tear-film osmolarity score and OSDI score among patients with DM. Schiffman et al. [24] evaluated the usefulness of the OSDI scoring system in 109 participants with dry eyes and 30 healthy participants, and conclude this questionnaire is a valid and reliable instrument for calculating the severity of dry eye disease. Khetwani et al. [13] and Zhang et al. [25] observed similar results. A study conducted by Kalaivani et al. [26] in 2017 in Puducherry, India among 191 patients with DM showed the prevalence of dry eye was 51.8%. About 42% prevalence of dry eye was reported by Sarkar et al. [14] and 54% by Manaviat et al. [6].
Our study showed the mean value of TFMH was 0.7 ± 1.96 (mm) in patients without dry eyes and 0.2 ± 1.38 (mm) in patients with dry eyes. Our study noted that the mean TFMH statistically, highly, and significantly correlated with the severity of dry eyes as compared to those without dry eyes (P < 0.005). Keserwani et al. [27] observed significantly lower Schirmer’s score and TBUT measurements in patients with DM than those without (P < 0.001). Patil et al. [28] also reported that patients with DM aged 50 years were examined for dry eye tests and observed a statistically significant association between the duration of DM and dry eyes (P = 0.00). Low Schimer’s test (48%) and TBUT (68%) values were found in patients with DM. Some amount of dryness was present in 34 subjects (68%). Similar observations were present in studies done by Sarkar et al. [14], Wasir et al. [22], and Kamel et al. [29].
In our study, blepharitis was observed in 23.7% of patients, whereas MGD was observed in 53.75% of patients. Lee et al. [30] stated that blepharitis is significantly related to metabolic syndromes such as DM, and can serve as an early sign of DM. Hom et al. [31] and Ansari et al. [32] observed similar results in their studies. In our present study, 44% of patients had Grade 0 MGD, 39% had Grade 1, 9% had Grade 2, and 8% had Grade 3, suggesting a positive correlation between the severity of dry eyes and grades of MGD. Manjula et al. [33] found 56% of patients in their study had dry eyes, and 24 of them had MGD. Shamsheer et al. [34] found that MGD was more common in the diabetic group (15%) compared to only 7% found in the control group with a p-value of 0.0015. Kumar et al. [7] found that 50% had MGD along with 54% showing varying degrees of dry eyes, which was statistically significant (P = 0.001). Kesarwani et al. [26] observed that when diabetics were compared with healthy controls, the diabetic group showed higher grades of corneal staining (P < 0.001) and conjunctival staining (P < 0.001).
Limitations
The study population was not followed up to record any disease progression or improvements. Considering a higher number of patients in the country, the sample size of 320 patients is inadequate. In the study, occupations and social activities such as reading or screen time on electronic devices were not taken into account as they can also cause dry eyes. The newer diagnostic tests such as confocal microscopy for corneal neuropathy, tear film osmolality, use of optical coherence tomography, refractive meniscometry for TFMH measurement, infrared meibography, interferometry to analyze lipid layer of the tear film, analysis of biomarkers in the tear film, the tear film stability analysis system (videokeratography), and ocular surface thermography were not implemented in the study although the outpatient department was equipped with these instruments.
Conclusions
Long-term DM predisposes to changes in the tear film causing ocular surface irregularities, which lead to dry eyes. Dry eye is common in patients with diabetes, and the same was proven in our study. The use of the OSDI scoring system is justified in this study. The OSDI questionnaire is an integral part of the examination, and its use should be a benchmark while diagnosing a patient with OSDs as its validity and reliability are unquestionable. The duration of DM plays an important role in ocular surface diseases. This study observed that dry eyes more frequently occur when patients have DM for a longer period. In an ophthalmology clinic, patients with DM should always be evaluated for any ocular surface changes when being screened for diabetic retinopathy, and proper guidelines should be implemented to detect changes in the ocular surface system as early as possible so that any long-term complications may be avoided at an early stage.
The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Human Ethics
Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital & Research Centre issued approval I.E.S.C/PGS/2019/109. This is to certify the synopsis (Reseach Protocol No. IESC/PGS/2019/109) titled "A study to Investigate Ocular Surface Diseases in Diabetics" to be done by Dr Kunj Shaileshbhai Naik under the guidance of Dr Renu Magdum Department of Ophthalmology of is ethically approved. The Thesis synopsis was approved by the Institutional Ethics Sub-Committee in its meeting held on 04/09/2019
Animal Ethics
Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.
References
- 1.Health: perception versus observation. Sen A. BMJ. 2002;324:860–861. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7342.860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Incidence trends for childhood type 1 diabetes in India. Kumar KM. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2015;19:0. doi: 10.4103/2230-8210.155378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Influence of diabetes mellitus on anterior segment of the eye. Han SB, Yang HK, Hyon JY. Clin Interv Aging. 2019;14:53–63. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S190713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.The ocular surface: the challenge to enable and protect vision. Gipson IK. https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2183739. Invest Opthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:4391–4398. doi: 10.1167/iovs.07-0770. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Tear film and ocular surface changes in diabetes mellitus. Alves Mde C, Carvalheira JB, Módulo CM, Rocha EM. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2008;71:96–103. doi: 10.1590/s0004-27492008000700018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Prevalence of dry eye syndrome and diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetic patients. Manaviat MR, Rashidi M, Afkhami-Ardekani M, Shoja MR. BMC Ophthalmol. 2008;8:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-8-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.A clinical study of meibomian gland dysfunction in patients with diabetes in Bundelkhand region. Kumar D, Chaubey D, Pratap Pratap, D D. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2017;16:14–18. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Tear function and ocular surface changes in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Dogru M, Katakami C, Inoue M. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:586–592. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00599-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.The lacrimal secretory system and its treatment. Jones L. Am J Ophthalmol. 1966;62:47–60. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(66)91676-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.A novel grading method for superficial punctate keratopathy magnitude and its correlation with corneal epithelial permeability. Miyata K, Amano S, Sawa M, Nishida T. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.11.1537. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:1537–1539. doi: 10.1001/archopht.121.11.1537. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Correlation of tear lipid layer interference patterns with the diagnosis and severity of dry eye. Yokoi N, Takehisa Y, Kinoshita S. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996;122:818–824. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)70378-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Diagnostic tests in the Sicca syndrome. van Bijsterveld OP. Arch Ophthalmol. 1969;82:10–14. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1969.00990020012003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ocular surface disorders in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Khetwani D, Karambelkar VH, Gadre GA. Int J Contemp Med Res. 2019;6:9–12. [Google Scholar]
- 14.An observational study on the prevalence of dry eyes in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and its relation to the duration and severity of disease. Sarkar KC, Bhattacharyya S, Sarkar P, et al. J Med Sci Health. 2021;7:68–72. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dry eye in diabetics: clinical study in rural population. Acharlu P, Nadig R, Vijayalekshmi S, et al. MIJOPH. 2020;14:46–49. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Correlation of dry eye and diabetes mellitus. Dutta SK, Paul G, Paul G. Indian J Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2021;7:25–30. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Dry eye in diabetic patients. Kaiserman I, Kaiserman N, Nakar S, Vinker S. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:498–503. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2004.10.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.The dry eye and diabetes mellitus. Seifart U, Strempel I. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8012143/ Ophthalmologe. 1994;91:235–239. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Assessment of ocular surface damage during the course of type 2 diabetes mellitus. He F, Zhao Z, Liu Y, Lu L, Fu Y. J Ophthalmol. 2018;2018:1206808. doi: 10.1155/2018/1206808. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Changes of tear film and ocular surface in diabetes mellitus. Yoon KC, Im SK, Seo MS. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2004;18:168–174. doi: 10.3341/kjo.2004.18.2.168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.To study prevalence of dry eyes in diabetic patients. Waris SA, Balaji RSN, Huda R. Indian J Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;5:40–43. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Estimation of prevalence of dry eye, and ocular surface changes, in patients of diabetes mellitus in Vijaypur District, India. Gannur AG, Patil MG, Lingadalli PB, et al. J Evolution Med Dent Sci. 2021;10:2559–2564. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Tear osmolarity and dry eye symptoms in diabetics. Fuerst N, Langelier N, Massaro-Giordano M, et al. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:507–515. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S51514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Reliability and validity of the ocular surface disease index. Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G, Hirsch JD, Reis BL. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:615–621. doi: 10.1001/archopht.118.5.615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Analysis of ocular surface dysfunction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Zhang M, Xiang YH. http://ies.ijo.cn/cn_publish/2020/11/202011003.pdf 2020;20:1853–1857. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Diabetes and dry eye. Kalaivani K. Int J Ocul Oncol Oculoplasty. 2017;3:40–42. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Tear film and ocular surface dysfunction in diabetes mellitus in an Indian population. Kesarwani D, Rizvi SW, Khan AA, Amitava AK, Vasenwala SM, Siddiqui Z. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2017;65:301–304. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_939_15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Study of dry eye parameters in diabetics in a tertiary care hospital. Patil S, Bishnoi S, Joshi A. Med J DY Patil Vidyapeeth. 2021;14:155–159. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Prevalence of dry eye in diabetics. Kamel SS, Mohammed TH, El Zankalony YA, et al. J Egypt Ophthalmol Soc. 2017;110:77–82. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Blepharitis as an early sign of metabolic syndrome: a nationwide population-based study. Lee CY, Chen HC, Lin HW, et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 2018;102:1283–1287. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310975. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Prevalence of meibomian gland dysfunction. Hom MM, Martinson JR, Knapp LL, Paugh JR. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67:710–712. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199009000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.The association between diabetes, level of glycaemic control and eye infection: cohort database study. Ansari AS, de Lusignan S, Hinton W, Munro N, McGovern A. Prim Care Diabetes. 2017;11:421–429. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2017.05.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.A clinical study on meibomian gland dysfunction and dry eye in patients with type2 diabetes mellitus. Manjula TR, Gahana K, Harsha R. J Med Sci Health. 2019;5:7–12. [Google Scholar]
- 34.A clinical study of meibomian gland dysfunction in patients with diabetes. Shamsheer RP, Arunachalam C. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2015;22:462–466. doi: 10.4103/0974-9233.167827. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]