Dan-Dan Jiang1, Jie Chen1, Frank Thorn2, Guang-Yun Mao3, Chun-Chun Li1, Zhong Lin1, Balamurali Vasudevan4, Xiao-Qiong Huang1, Yan-Yan Chen1. 1. The Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325000, Zhejiang Province, China. 2. Deptartment of Brain & Cognitive Sciences, MIT Cambridge, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. 3. School of Public Health, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325000, Zhejiang Province, China. 4. College of Optometry, MidWestern University, Glendale, AZ 84729, USA.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the effects of school-based comprehensive intervention on myopia development in elementary school children. METHODS: As a part of the Wenzhou Epidemiology of Refraction Error Study, there were 1524 participating elementary students (730 girls, 47.9%) in grades 1 to 3 from three campuses of one school, aged 7.3±0.9y, who were examined twice every year for a 2.5y follow up period. Comprehensive intervention and other reminders were given at school every semester for the intervention group. The control group did not receive comprehensive intervention and did not have reminders of it. RESULTS: There were 651 students in the intervention group [mean age 7.3±0.9y; 294 (45.2%) girls] and 737 students in the control group [mean age 7.2±0.9y; 346 (46.9%) girls]. Overall mean myopia progression during the 2.5y follow-up was -0.49±1.04 diopters (D) in the intervention group and -0.65±1.08 D in the control group (P=0.004). The majority that not get myopia at baseline spherical equivalent (SE≤-1.0 D). Their mean myopia progression during the 2.5y follow-up was -0.37±0.89 D in the intervention group and -0.51±0.93 D in the control group (27.5% reduction, P=0.009); Overall, mean axial length elongation was less in the intervention group (0.56±0.32 mm) than in the control group (0.61±0.38 mm, 10.5% reduction, P=0.009). The percentage of close reading distance (<30 cm) in the intervention group was less than in the control group (73.4% vs 76.2%, P<0.001), the percentage of everyday perform eye exercises in the intervention group was more than in the control group (27.8% vs 20.7%, P<0.001) 30mo later. CONCLUSION: The comprehensive intervention program at elementary school has a significant alleviating effect on myopia progression for children during the 2.5y follow-up, especially for those non-myopia at baseline. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
AIM: To investigate the effects of school-based comprehensive intervention on myopia development in elementary school children. METHODS: As a part of the Wenzhou Epidemiology of Refraction Error Study, there were 1524 participating elementary students (730 girls, 47.9%) in grades 1 to 3 from three campuses of one school, aged 7.3±0.9y, who were examined twice every year for a 2.5y follow up period. Comprehensive intervention and other reminders were given at school every semester for the intervention group. The control group did not receive comprehensive intervention and did not have reminders of it. RESULTS: There were 651 students in the intervention group [mean age 7.3±0.9y; 294 (45.2%) girls] and 737 students in the control group [mean age 7.2±0.9y; 346 (46.9%) girls]. Overall mean myopia progression during the 2.5y follow-up was -0.49±1.04 diopters (D) in the intervention group and -0.65±1.08 D in the control group (P=0.004). The majority that not get myopia at baseline spherical equivalent (SE≤-1.0 D). Their mean myopia progression during the 2.5y follow-up was -0.37±0.89 D in the intervention group and -0.51±0.93 D in the control group (27.5% reduction, P=0.009); Overall, mean axial length elongation was less in the intervention group (0.56±0.32 mm) than in the control group (0.61±0.38 mm, 10.5% reduction, P=0.009). The percentage of close reading distance (<30 cm) in the intervention group was less than in the control group (73.4% vs 76.2%, P<0.001), the percentage of everyday perform eye exercises in the intervention group was more than in the control group (27.8% vs 20.7%, P<0.001) 30mo later. CONCLUSION: The comprehensive intervention program at elementary school has a significant alleviating effect on myopia progression for children during the 2.5y follow-up, especially for those non-myopia at baseline. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
Entities:
Keywords:
axial length; comprehensive intervention; myopia progression; school children
Authors: Brien A Holden; Timothy R Fricke; David A Wilson; Monica Jong; Kovin S Naidoo; Padmaja Sankaridurg; Tien Y Wong; Thomas J Naduvilath; Serge Resnikoff Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Katie M Williams; Geir Bertelsen; Phillippa Cumberland; Christian Wolfram; Virginie J M Verhoeven; Eleftherios Anastasopoulos; Gabriëlle H S Buitendijk; Audrey Cougnard-Grégoire; Catherine Creuzot-Garcher; Maja Gran Erke; Ruth Hogg; René Höhn; Pirro Hysi; Anthony P Khawaja; Jean-François Korobelnik; Janina Ried; Johannes R Vingerling; Alain Bron; Jean-François Dartigues; Astrid Fletcher; Albert Hofman; Robert W A M Kuijpers; Robert N Luben; Konrad Oxele; Fotis Topouzis; Therese von Hanno; Alireza Mirshahi; Paul J Foster; Cornelia M van Duijn; Norbert Pfeiffer; Cécile Delcourt; Caroline C W Klaver; Jugnoo Rahi; Christopher J Hammond Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 12.079