Evidence Hub

Discordant dry eye disease and chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Hoffmann M, Farrell S, Colorado LH, Edwards K

Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association, 2024

3,281,882 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relative contributions of objective and subjective indicators of dry eye disease (DED) in individuals with chronic pain conditions compared with controls.

METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of studies that reported the signs and symptoms of DED and/or their prevalence in individuals with chronic pain compared with controls. International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 codes for chronic pain conditions were applied, and outcomes defined as DED signs and symptoms. A search strategy utilised the EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and MEDLINE databases. Risk of bias assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Random effects meta-analysis calculated mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR), while subgroup analysis of different chronic pain conditions explored their relative association with the signs and symptoms of DED. Evidence certainty was evaluated using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS: Fourteen observational studies comprising 3,281,882 individuals were included. Meta-analysis found high quality evidence that individuals with chronic pain were more likely to experience symptoms of DED than controls (OR = 3.51 [95 %CI: 3.45,3.57]). These symptoms were more severe (MD = 18.53 [95 %CI: 11.90, 25.15]) than controls with a clinically meaningful effect size. Individuals with chronic pain had more…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,281,882 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free