Literature DB >> 14516802

The course of moderate amblyopia treated with atropine in children: experience of the amblyopia treatment study.

.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the course of the response to atropine treatment of moderate amblyopia and to assess factors predictive of the treatment response in children 3 years old to younger than 7 years old.
DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing atropine and patching (one of the amblyopia treatment studies).
METHODS: A total of 195 children 3 years old to younger than 7 years of age with amblyopia in the range of 20/40 to 20/100 from the atropine treatment arm of this trial were enrolled and included in this analysis. At baseline, daily topical atropine was prescribed for the sound eye. During follow-up, a plano spectacle lens was prescribed for the sound eye for patients whose amblyopia had not been successfully treated with atropine alone. Follow-up examinations were performed at 5 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was visual acuity in the amblyopic eye at 6 months.
RESULTS: Mean visual acuity improved from baseline by 1.3 lines after 5 weeks of treatment, by 2.4 lines after 16 weeks, and by 2.8 lines at 6 months. Visual acuity of 20/30 or better and/or 3 or more lines of improvement from baseline was achieved by 75% of the patients. Improvement occurred over the entire range of baseline acuities (20/40 to 20/100) and was not related to patient age (P =.36). Among the 134 patients improving 3 or more lines from baseline, 7% achieved their maximum improvement by 5 weeks and 46% by 16 weeks. Among the 55 patients who did not respond adequately to atropine alone and were prescribed a plano lens for the sound eye, the mean improvement before the use of the plano lens was 1.0 lines, compared with 1.6 lines after prescribing the plano lens (P =.11). None of the demographic or clinical factors assessed was predictive of the response to treatment. A shift in fixation preference at/near from the atropinized sound eye to the amblyopic eye was not required for the amblyopic eye to improve; amblyopic eye acuity improved 3 or more lines in 29 (60%) of the 48 patients who were found to be using the atropinized sound eye on fixation preference testing. A 2 or more line decrease in sound eye visual acuity occurred more frequently when a plano lens was prescribed in addition to atropine (7 of 43, 16%) compared with treatment with atropine alone (4 of 123, 3%; P =.01).
CONCLUSIONS: A beneficial effect of atropine is present throughout the age range of 3 years old to younger than 7 years old, and with an acuity range of 20/40 to 20/100. A shift in near fixation to the amblyopic eye is not essential for atropine to be effective in all cases. Sound eye acuity should be monitored when a plano spectacle lens is prescribed for the sound eye to augment the treatment effect of atropine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14516802     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(03)00458-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.258


  19 in total

1.  Optical treatment of strabismic and combined strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia.

Authors:  Susan A Cotter; Nicole C Foster; Jonathan M Holmes; B Michele Melia; David K Wallace; Michael X Repka; Susanna M Tamkins; Raymond T Kraker; Roy W Beck; Darren L Hoover; Eric R Crouch; Aaron M Miller; Christie L Morse; Donny W Suh
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 12.079

2.  A randomized trial of adding a plano lens to atropine for amblyopia.

Authors:  David K Wallace; Elizabeth L Lazar; Michael X Repka; Jonathan M Holmes; Raymond T Kraker; Darren L Hoover; Katherine K Weise; Amy L Waters; Melissa L Rice; Robert J Peters
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.220

Review 3.  The treatment of amblyopia: current practice and emerging trends.

Authors:  Eleni Papageorgiou; Ioannis Asproudis; Gail Maconachie; Evangelia E Tsironi; Irene Gottlob
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia.

Authors:  Tianjing Li; Riaz Qureshi; Kate Taylor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-08-28

5.  Effect of age on response to amblyopia treatment in children.

Authors:  Jonathan M Holmes; Elizabeth L Lazar; B Michele Melia; William F Astle; Linda R Dagi; Sean P Donahue; Marcela G Frazier; Richard W Hertle; Michael X Repka; Graham E Quinn; Katherine K Weise
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-07-11

6.  A Randomized Trial of Binocular Dig Rush Game Treatment for Amblyopia in Children Aged 4 to 6 Years.

Authors:  Ruth E Manny; Jonathan M Holmes; Raymond T Kraker; Zhuokai Li; Amy L Waters; Krista R Kelly; Lingkun Kong; Earl R Crouch; Ingryd J Lorenzana; Maan S Alkharashi; Jennifer A Galvin; Melissa L Rice; B Michele Melia; Susan A Cotter
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  The Amblyopia Treatment Studies: Implications for Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Angela M Chen; Susan A Cotter
Journal:  Adv Ophthalmol Optom       Date:  2016-08

8.  Amblyopia therapy in Asian children: factors affecting visual outcome and parents' perception of children's attitudes towards amblyopia treatment.

Authors:  Swati Handa; Audrey Chia
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 1.858

9.  Current concepts in the management of amblyopia.

Authors:  Blanca Ruiz de Zárate; Jaime Tejedor
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-12

10.  Treatment of severe amblyopia with weekend atropine: results from 2 randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Michael X Repka; Raymond T Kraker; Roy W Beck; Eileen Birch; Susan A Cotter; Jonathan M Holmes; Richard W Hertle; Darren L Hoover; Deborah L Klimek; Wendy Marsh-Tootle; Mitchell M Scheiman; Donny W Suh; David R Weakley
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.220

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.