Wearing Swimming Goggles Research Articles

The short-term effects of wearing swimming goggles on corneal biomechanics

PurposeThis study aimed to assess the impact of wearing swimming goggles (SG) on corneal biomechanics.MethodsCorneal deformation response, central corneal thickness (CCT), intraocular pressure (IOP) and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) were measured with the Corvis system (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany) in thirty-one healthy young adults while wearing a drilled SG. All measurements were obtained before, at 30 s, 2 min, 3.5 min and 5 min of wearing SG, just after SG removal and after 2 min of SG removal.ResultsThe corneal biomechanics is sensitive to SG wear, observing lower corneal deformability during SG use. Specifically, wearing SG caused an increase in the time and length of the first applanation and radius curvature at the highest concavity, as well as a decrease and in the velocity of the first applanation and time and deformation amplitude of the second applanation (p < 0.001 in all cases). After SG removal, corneal biomechanical parameters showed a rebound-effect, obtaining a higher corneal deformability in comparison with baseline reading (p-corrected < 0.05 in all cases). Additionally, IOP and bIOP significantly increased while wearing SG (p < 0.001 in both cases), whereas CCT remained stable (p = 0.850).ConclusionsWearing SG modifies the biomechanical properties of the cornea, with reduced corneal deformability during SG wear. The outcomes of this study should be taken into consideration when making clinical decisions in subjects at high risk of developing corneal ectasias or glaucoma, as well as in the post-surgical management of these ocular conditions.

Effects of wearing swimming goggles on non-invasive tear break-up time in a laboratory setting

PurposeThe use of swimming goggles (SG) has demonstrated to alter different ocular parameters, however, the impact of wearing SG on the tear film stability remain unknown. The main objective of this study was to determine the short-term effects of wearing SG on tear film surface quality break-up time (TFSQ-BUT). MethodsTwenty-eight young healthy adults (14 men and 14 women) wore a drilled SG, and TFSQ-BUT was measured before, during and after SG use. Dynamic-area high-speed videokeratoscopy was used for the non-invasive assessment of TFSQ-BUT. ResultsTFSQ-BUT was significantly reduced while SG wear in comparison to the baseline measurement (4.8 ± 4.5 s vs. 8.8 ± 6.9 s; corrected p-value = 0.017, d = 0.57, mean difference = 4.0 [0.6, 7.3]; 45% reduction). Immediately after SG removal, TFSQ-BUT rapidly recovered baseline levels (8.2 ± 5.9 s vs. 8.8 ± 6.9 s; corrected p-value = 0.744). The impact of wearing SG on TFSQ-BUT were independent of the gender of the participants (p = 0.934). ConclusionThe use of SG induces a TFSQ-BUT reduction, with these changes returning to baseline levels immediately after SG removal. These data may be of relevance for the management of dry eye patients, who need to avoid circumstances that exacerbate tear film instability. Nevertheless, these results must be interpreted with caution since the experiment did not entirely mimic real-life conditions (e.g., eye cup piece drilled, time of exposure, environmental conditions). Future studies should consider the inclusion of dry eye patients and older individual in order to explore the generalizability of these findings.

Wearing Swimming Goggles Reduces Central Corneal Thickness and Anterior Chamber Angle, and Increases Intraocular Pressure

ABSTRACTPurpose/Aim: To assess the changes in anterior eye segment biometrics and intraocular pressure during and after wearing swimming goggles.Materials and methods: Anterior segment biometry and intraocular pressure were assessed in 20 healthy young adults (22.2 ± 4.7 years) during the wearing of a drilled swimming goggle. The central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth, anterior chamber volume, and anterior chamber angle, using the Pentacam rotating Scheimpflug camera (Oculus Optikgerate GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), and intraocular pressure, using a rebound tonometer, were obtained before, at 2, 3.5, and 5 min of wearing swimming goggle, just after removal, as well as after 5 min of recovery.Results: During swimming goggles wear, there was a significant corneal thinning (54.8 ± 41.1 µm, p < .001, ƞp2 = 0.532), iridocorneal angle reduction (2.6 ± 2.6 degrees, p < .001, ƞp2 = 0.241) and intraocular pressure elevation (4.0 ± 1.9 mmHg, p < .001, ƞp2 = 0.530). These changes returned to baseline values immediately after swimming goggle removal (corrected p-value <0.05 in all cases). No significant effects of swimming goggles use were observed for anterior chamber depth and anterior chamber volume.Conclusions: Wearing swimming goggles leads to acute corneal thinning, iridocorneal angle reduction, and intraocular pressure elevation. These findings may be of special relevance for individuals with corneal ectasias, as well as for individuals at high risk of glaucoma onset or progression.

Does wearing swimming goggles affect corneal morphology in keratoconic eyes?

A significant transient increase in intraocular pressure in individuals wearing swimming goggles has been demonstrated in previous studies. These findings suggested that wearing swimming goggles could represent a significant risk factor for worsening of corneal parameters in patients with keratoconus who swim regularly. The aim of this study was to investigate corneal parameters in patients with keratoconus after wearing swimming goggles. Comprehensive ocular examinations were performed on 74 eyes of 37 patients with keratoconus. Measurements of the corneal front keratometry values (Kflat, Ksteep, and Kmax), central corneal thickness, corneal apex thickness, thinnest corneal thickness, corneal volume, anterior chamber volume, anterior chamber depth, and iridocorneal angle were performed in outpatient clinics using a Pentacam® Scheimpflug camera (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) before the patients wore swimming goggles and after they wore swimming goggles for 1, 10, and 20 min. A p-value of <0.05 was regarded as statistically significant. The average values before and after wearing swimming goggles for 1, 10, and 20 min were 52.72 ± 5.36, 52.64 ± 5.52, 52.62 ± 5.38, and 52.22 ± 4.86, respectively (p=0.257). The average values before and after wearing swimming goggles for 1, 10, and 20 min were 46.01 ± 3.17, 46.09 ± 3.17, 46.06 ± 3.26, and 46.04 ± 3.17, respectively (p=0.426). The average values before and after wearing swimming goggles for 1, 10, and 20 min were 49.02 ± 3.56, 49.06 ± 3.61, 49.08 ± 3.62, and 49.07 ± 3.61, respectively (p=0.750). No other corneal parameters showed changes after wearing swimming goggles (p>0.05). However, the anterior chamber volume markedly decreased after wearing swimming goggles (p<0.001). These findings suggested that the short-term use of swimming goggles does not increase the risk of corneal parameter worsening in patients with keratoconus.

The Effects of Swimming Goggles on Intraocular Pressure in Children

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of wearing swimming goggles on intraocular pressure in children. The study comprises of 20 eyes from 10 children, 4 male (40%) and 6 female (60%). T...

Mechanisms for acute corneal hydrops and perforation.

Acute corneal hydrops (ACH) and perforation in corneal thinning diseases are the consequences of exposure to distending intraocular pressure (IOP) forces that are in excess of corneal resistance to them. Apart from thinning, resistance to these forces may be reduced by disease-related tissue changes, such as corneal scarring, which could lower resistance to IOP. Eye rubbing trauma has sometimes been found to be associated with ACH and perforation. This association is not surprising given that the combination of rubbing-related mechanical tissue trauma and the associated increased distending stress of higher IOP seem likely to increase the risk of complications. Many cases of ACH and perforation are described as spontaneous, but this classification may be the consequence of not considering the multiple potential mechanisms for IOP elevation such as coughing, sneezing, nose blowing, and sneeze suppression in addition to those related to eye rubbing/wiping/massaging/touching as well as changes in body orientation, strenuous exercise, and wearing swimming goggles for example. Classification of ACH or perforation as spontaneous may lead patients to assume that nothing can be done to avoid these complications. Patients with corneal thinning diseases who are counseled regarding the potential precipitating mechanisms for IOP elevation will have the opportunity of reducing exposure to them and the risk of the associated complications. In addition, when ACH or perforation occur, faster resolution of edema and wound healing may depend on reducing potentially exacerbating exposures to mechanisms for IOP elevation.

도수 수경 착용시 실내와 수중에서의 시각적 만족도 및 시력 평가

목적: 실내수영장에서 도수 수경 착용에 따른 주관적 만족도 평가와 실내 검사실 및 수중에서의 시력을 비교하고자 한다. 방법: 실험에 참여한 대상자는 평균나이가 <TEX>$22{\pm}1.54$</TEX>세인 15명의 대학생이었으며, 오른쪽 눈과 왼쪽 눈의 평균 굴절이상은 각각 RE: S-1.67 D/C-0.40 D, LE: S-1.70D/C-0.37 D이었다. 모든 참여자는 기초적인 안과검사를 마쳤으며, 굴절이상을 교정하기 위한 콘택트렌즈 착용이 가능하고 수영이 가능한 자로 한정하였다. 모든 피실험자의 굴절이상은 콘택트렌즈를 이용하여, 정시상태로 교정을 하였다. 난시가 인위적으로 유발된 원주도수 수경(C+1.50 D, Ax <TEX>$90^{\circ}$</TEX>)을 착용하였을 때와 도수가 없는 수경을 착용하였을 때 시력, 안정피로, 그리고 수영장 주위를 걸을 때의 균형감각에 대한 주관적인 만족도 평가를 설문지를 이용하여 실시하였다. 시력 평가는 처방 S+3.00 D ~ S-3.00 D까지 0.50 D단위로 준비된 서로 다른 도수의 수경을 무작위의 순서로 착용한 상태에서 수영장내의 수중과 실내의 검사실에서 ETDRS 시표를 사용하여 측정하였다. 결과: 난시가 인위적으로 유발된 상태에서는 시력, 안정피로, 균형감각에 대한 3가지 만족도가 모두 유의하게 저하되는 것으로 나타났다. 서로 다른 도수의 수경을 착용하였을 때 시력은 유의하게 영향을 받는 것으로 나타났으나(p<0.05), 실내 검사실과 수중에서 측정된 시력의 차이는 없었다(p=0.173). 일부 도수 수경(+3.00, +1.00, +0.50, 0, -1.00, -2.00 D)에서는 실내 검사실에서 측정된 시력이 수중에서 측정된 시력보다 향상된 것으로 나타났다. 결론: 수중에서 수경을 착용하는 것은 시력을 저하시킬 수 있지만 저하되는 시력의 정도는 스넬렌 시력기준 1라인 이내 차이로써 실제 임상에서는 거의 영향이 없을 정도로 적은 수준이었다. 하지만 난시의 미교정은 시각적 만족도에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으므로, 수영장의 미끄러운 환경을 고려하였을 때 안전사고의 위험이 내재한다고 할 수 있다. 따라서 도수 수경의 도수의 정확성과 더불어 난시의 교정이 필요하다고 할 수 있다. Purpose: To investigate the visual function with prescription swimming goggles. Methods: 15 university students (mean age: <TEX>$22{\pm}1.54$</TEX> years) participated, with a mean distance refractive error of RE: S-1.67 D/C-0.40 D, LE: S-1.70D/C-0.37 D. Inclusion criteria were no ocular pathology, able to wear soft contact lenses to correct their refractive error to emmetropia and able to swim. Participants were fitted with contact lenses to correct all ametropia. Subjective evaluation for satisfaction of visual acuity, asthenopia and balance were also measured using a questionnaire while wearing swimming goggles with cylinder (C+1.50 D, Ax <TEX>$90^{\circ}$</TEX>) compared with plano sphere outside the swimming pool area. Visual acuity was assessed using the same ETDRS chart. The prescription swimming goggles powers were assessed in random order and ranged in power from S+3.00 D to S-3.00 D in 0.50 D steps. Results: Subjective evaluation was significantly worse for the swimming goggles with cylinder than for the plano powered goggles for all 3 questions, visual acuity, asthenopia and balance. Visual acuity were significantly affected by the different power of the swimming goggles (p<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the in-air in-clinic and underwater in-swimming pool measures (p=0.173). However, visual acuity measured in the clinic was significantly better than underwater for some swimming goggle powers (+3.00, +1.00, +0.50, 0, -1.00 and -2.00 D). Conclusions: Wearing swimming goggles underwater may degrade the visual acuity compared to within air but as the difference is less than 1 line of Snellen acuity, and it is unlikely to result in significant real-life effects. Having an incorrect cylinder correction was found to be detrimental resulting in lower score of satisfaction. Considering slippery floor of swimming pool area, it can be a potential risk factor. Therefore, it is important to correct any refractive error in addition to astigmatism for swimming goggle.

Case of normal tension glaucoma induced or exacerbated by wearing swimming goggles

Case of normal tension glaucoma induced or exacerbated by wearing swimming goggles

Swimming goggles and elevated intraocular pressure

We would like to congratulate Dr Morgan and colleagues on their recent paper “Wearing swimming goggles can elevate intraocular pressure.” We performed a similar study and presented our data at...

Wearing swimming goggles can elevate intraocular pressure

Aim:To examine the acute effects of wearing swimming goggles upon intraocular pressure (IOP).Methods:This research consisted of a Pilot study and a Validation study. Holes were drilled into the faces of...

The Effect of Swimming Goggles on Intraocular Pressure and Blood Flow within the Optic Nerve Head

PurposeGoggles are frequently worn in the sport of swimming and are designed to form a seal around the periorbital tissue orbit. The resultant pressure on the eye may have the potential to affect intraocular pressure and blood flow of the optic nerve head. This study evaluates the influence of wearing swimming goggles on intraocular pressure (IOP) and blood flow of the ocular nerve head (ONH) in normal subjects.Materials and MethodsThirty healthy participants took part in this study. The IOP of each participant was measured using a Goldmann tonometer. Measurements were taken immediately before putting on swimming goggles, at 5, 10, 30, and 60 minutes after putting on swimming goggles, and then immediately after taking off the goggles. Blood flow of the ONH was measured using the Heidelberg retinal flowmeter.ResultsThe average IOP before, during and after wearing the swimming goggles were 11.88 ± 2.82 mmHg, 14.20 ± 2.81mmHg and 11.78 ± 2.89 mmHg, respectively. The IOP increased immediately after putting on the goggles (p < 0.05) and then returned to normal values immediately after removal (p > 0.05). Blood flow of the ONH was 336.60 ± 89.07 Arbitrary Units (AU) before and 319.18 ± 96.02 AU after the goggles were worn (p < 0.05).ConclusionA small but significant IOP elevation was observed immediately after the swimming goggles were put on. This elevated IOP was maintained while the goggles were kept on, and then returned to normal levels as soon as they were taken off. Blood flow of the ONH did not change significantly throughout the experiment. These facts should be considered for safety concerns, especially in advanced glaucoma patients.

Skin irritation in users of brominated pools

This study investigated adverse skin and eye effects in swimmers using pools with three different disinfection systems (chlorine, chlorine/ozone and bromine/ozone) and monitored water quality parameters that may be related to adverse health effects. A cross-sectional study of 770 children swimming in three school pools was carried out over a 4 week period in November 1994 using a postal questionnaire. Physico-chemical and bacteriological parameters of water quality were monitored on a weekly basis. Responses were obtained for 385 swimmers. Skin rashes with an onset less than 24 h after swimming in the school pool were reported by 4‐8% of swimmers. Compared with the bromine/ozone pool, the odds ratio (OR) of having a rash that started less than 24 h after pool use was 1.91 (CI 0.71‐5.10) for the chlorine pool and 1.88 (CI 0.61‐5.81) for the chlorine/ozone pool. Adjustment for possible confounders made no significant differences to these results. Eye redness, itch or irritation was reported by 23‐33% of swimmers and 24% of non-swimmers, and wearing swimming goggles had a protective effect (OR 0.40; CI 0.24, 0.65). Disinfectant levels were more consistently maintained in the pools with automatically controlled systems. The bromine disinfection system was not associated with a greater risk of the development of skin rashes than other disinfection systems, but the numbers were small, and need to be interpreted with caution.

Health effects of attending a public swimming pool: follow up of a cohort of pupils in Paris.

This study aimed to determine the health effects of attending a well-kept school swimming pool maintained according to French public health regulations. This prospective month long study was carried out on a randomised sample of pupils aged 5 to 18 years who attended a private French school with two swimming pools. The children surveyed, helped by their parents, had to fill in questionnaires about their bathing habits and symptoms during the survey period. Inspections of the pool complex were made and these included physicochemical and bacteriological analyses of the pools' water. The response rates achieved were 70% at primary and middle school levels but only 25% in the high school pupils. Because of this older teenagers were excluded from the final analysis (of 246 children). Compared with non-bathers, bathers experienced fatigue and eye irritation significantly more often (p < 0.001). The eyes were red (38% of bathers) and/or watery (16%) after swimming but this resolved spontaneously within 24 hours. Bathing behaviour (bath duration, head immersion, wearing swimming goggles) did not affect these incidence rates noticeably. There were no differences between bathers and non-bathers with regard to other symptoms, especially otolaryngological ones. This survey does not allow definite conclusions to be made about verrucas because 22% of non-bathers were exempted from swimming because of verrucas that they might have caught previously in a pool. Except for verrucas, the methodology was adequate and daily self reporting of symptoms was feasible. This college largely recruits pupils from higher social classes and is not therefore representative of schools in Paris.