{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019008264462809916, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003305785123966942, 'mean_word_length': 5.21025641025641, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Daily disposed hydrogel lenses--a comparison with biweekly replacement.

BACKGROUND
Hydrogel lenses worn daily and disposed of daily represent an extreme of the spectrum of prescribing that has not been extensively investigated. This study was undertaken to ascertain whether hydrogel lenses worn on a daily replacement schedule displayed differences in patient comfort, vision, and physiological response and as compared to lenses replaced biweekly.


METHODS
Hydrogel lens wearing schedules were devised to allow the patient to, in a masked fashion, directly compare the characteristics of a 1-day-old hydrogel lens to that of one 2 weeks old. Eighteen qualifying subjects wore Bausch & Lomb Seequence 2 lenses in this investigation.


RESULTS
There was neither a significant difference in visual acuity, lens condition, and corneal or bulbar conjunctival fluorescein staining, nor a significant difference in subjective ratings of wearing comfort and clarity of vision between the 1-day and biweekly worn lenses.


CONCLUSIONS
No apparent advantage was found in replacing the evaluated hydrogel lenses on a daily vs. biweekly schedule when considering vision, comfort, and physiological response of the eye.