Retire 'Artificial Tears': A Call for Updated Terminology in Eye Care (ft. Kaleb Abbott, OD, MS)

In Episode 4 of From Paper to Clinic, “Retire 'Artificial Tears': A Call for Updated Terminology in Eye Care,” Kaleb Abbott, OD, MS, joins the show to challenge the entrenched language and assumptions in dry eye care. He argues that the term “artificial tears” is fundamentally misleading—based on an outdated 1988 FDA monograph and bearing less than 1% similarity to true human tears—while natural tears themselves form an extraordinarily complex, biologically active “rainforest” of thousands of proteins, lipids, vitamins, growth factors, and mucins. The pair also critiques other misnomers such as “dry eye” and even “ocular surface disease."

They also spoke to the clinical management of these patients, exploring common pitfalls such as underestimating patients’ motivation for relief, being too conservative with treatment intensity, and failing to identify the true origin of discomfort—whether evaporative or aqueous-deficient disease, meibomian gland dysfunction, or non-ocular neuropathic pain. Abbott highlighted underutilized therapies like blood-derived products (autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma tears), which more closely approximate natural tear composition, while Shah underscored the value of amniotic membranes as a powerful “reset button” for severely compromised ocular surfaces.

The paper inspiring this discussion is "It's time to retire the terms artificial tears and rewetting drops: A call for accurate terminology and updated clinical usage in eye care" by Abbott and Andrew D. Pucker, OD, PhD, published in The Ocular Surface.