J T Flynn1, J Schiffman, W Feuer, A Corona. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami School of Medicine, Florida, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Although the treatment of amblyopia with occlusion has changed little over the past 3 centuries, there is little agreement about which regimes are most effective and for what reasons. OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcome of occlusion therapy in patients with anisometropic, strabismic, and strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia employing the raw data from 961 patients reported in 23 studies published between 1965 and 1994. DESIGN: Analysis of the published literature on amblyopia therapy results during the above interval, utilizing primary data obtained from the authors of these articles or tables published in the articles detailing individual patient outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: 961 amblyopic patients, participants in 23 studies, undergoing patching therapy for amblyopia from 1965 to 1994 with anisometropia, strabismus, or anisometropia-strabismus. MAIN OUTCOMES: In the pooled data set, success of occlusion therapy was defined as visual acuity of 20/40 at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Success by the 20/40 criteria was achieved in 512 of 689 (74.3%) patients. By category, 312 of 402 (77.6%) were successful in strabismic amblyopia, 44 of 75 (58.7%) in strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia, and 72 of 108 (66.7%) in anisometropic amblyopia. Success was not related to the duration of occlusion therapy, type of occlusion used, accompanying refractive error, patient's sex, or eye. Univariate analyses showed that success was related to the age at which therapy was initiated; the type of amblyopia; the depth of visual loss before treatment for the anisometropic patients and the strabismic patients, but not for the anisometropic-strabismic patients; and the difference in spherical equivalents between eyes, for the anisometropic patients. Logistic/linear regression revealed that 3 were independent predictors of a successful outcome of amblyopia therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that appear most closely related to a successful outcome are age, type of amblyopia, and depth of visual loss before treatment. These may be related to factors, as yet undetermined in the pathogenesis of amblyopia. With present emphasis on the value of screening and prevention and the development of new screening tools, such a look at the results of amblyopia therapy in a large population seems indicated.
CONTEXT: Although the treatment of amblyopia with occlusion has changed little over the past 3 centuries, there is little agreement about which regimes are most effective and for what reasons. OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcome of occlusion therapy in patients with anisometropic, strabismic, and strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia employing the raw data from 961 patients reported in 23 studies published between 1965 and 1994. DESIGN: Analysis of the published literature on amblyopia therapy results during the above interval, utilizing primary data obtained from the authors of these articles or tables published in the articles detailing individual patient outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: 961 amblyopic patients, participants in 23 studies, undergoing patching therapy for amblyopia from 1965 to 1994 with anisometropia, strabismus, or anisometropia-strabismus. MAIN OUTCOMES: In the pooled data set, success of occlusion therapy was defined as visual acuity of 20/40 at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Success by the 20/40 criteria was achieved in 512 of 689 (74.3%) patients. By category, 312 of 402 (77.6%) were successful in strabismic amblyopia, 44 of 75 (58.7%) in strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia, and 72 of 108 (66.7%) in anisometropic amblyopia. Success was not related to the duration of occlusion therapy, type of occlusion used, accompanying refractive error, patient's sex, or eye. Univariate analyses showed that success was related to the age at which therapy was initiated; the type of amblyopia; the depth of visual loss before treatment for the anisometropic patients and the strabismic patients, but not for the anisometropic-strabismic patients; and the difference in spherical equivalents between eyes, for the anisometropic patients. Logistic/linear regression revealed that 3 were independent predictors of a successful outcome of amblyopia therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that appear most closely related to a successful outcome are age, type of amblyopia, and depth of visual loss before treatment. These may be related to factors, as yet undetermined in the pathogenesis of amblyopia. With present emphasis on the value of screening and prevention and the development of new screening tools, such a look at the results of amblyopia therapy in a large population seems indicated.