Acceptance of Topical Atropine over Physical Occluders in Treatment of Amblyopia in Children
Creators
- 1. Associate Professor, JNUIMSRC, Jaipur
- 2. Senior Consultant, Sahai Hospital & Research Centre, Jaipur
- 3. Resident (Ophthalmology), JNUIMSRC
Description
Background: Amblyopia is a common cause of monocular visual impairment in children. Conventional treatment involves occlusion therapy, but compliance can be a challenge. Atropine penalization has emerged as a potential alternative treatment option. Objective: To compare the acceptance and efficacy of topical atropine penalization with conventional occlusion therapy in the treatment of amblyopia in children aged 3-12 years. Methods: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 30 children with amblyopia were randomly allocated to either atropine penalization (n=15) or occlusion therapy (n=15) for 6 months. Visual acuity, treatment compliance, adverse effects, and parental satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months. Results: Both atropine penalization and occlusion therapy resulted in significant improvements in visual acuity from baseline to 6 months (P<0.001), with no significant difference in the magnitude of improvement between the groups (P=0.18). Compliance was significantly better in the atropine group, with a mean of 4.2 ± 2.8 days of missed treatment compared to 8.5 ± 4.6 days in the occlusion group (P=0.004). The occurrence of adverse effects was similar between the groups (P=0.26). Parental satisfaction scores were slightly higher in the atropine group, but these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Atropine penalization is as effective as occlusion therapy in improving visual acuity in children with amblyopia, with the added advantages of better treatment compliance and slightly higher parental satisfaction. These findings support the use of atropine penalization as a viable alternative to occlusion therapy in the management of amblyopia in children.
Abstract (English)
Background: Amblyopia is a common cause of monocular visual impairment in children. Conventional treatment involves occlusion therapy, but compliance can be a challenge. Atropine penalization has emerged as a potential alternative treatment option. Objective: To compare the acceptance and efficacy of topical atropine penalization with conventional occlusion therapy in the treatment of amblyopia in children aged 3-12 years. Methods: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 30 children with amblyopia were randomly allocated to either atropine penalization (n=15) or occlusion therapy (n=15) for 6 months. Visual acuity, treatment compliance, adverse effects, and parental satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months. Results: Both atropine penalization and occlusion therapy resulted in significant improvements in visual acuity from baseline to 6 months (P<0.001), with no significant difference in the magnitude of improvement between the groups (P=0.18). Compliance was significantly better in the atropine group, with a mean of 4.2 ± 2.8 days of missed treatment compared to 8.5 ± 4.6 days in the occlusion group (P=0.004). The occurrence of adverse effects was similar between the groups (P=0.26). Parental satisfaction scores were slightly higher in the atropine group, but these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Atropine penalization is as effective as occlusion therapy in improving visual acuity in children with amblyopia, with the added advantages of better treatment compliance and slightly higher parental satisfaction. These findings support the use of atropine penalization as a viable alternative to occlusion therapy in the management of amblyopia in children.
Files
IJPCR,Vol16,Issue3,Article286.pdf
Files
(335.4 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:c58ddf5a6f855f43522a881e2f684feb
|
335.4 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2024-02-25
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/16/IJPCR,Vol16,Issue3,Article286.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Holmes JM, Clarke MP. Amblyopia. Lancet. 2006;367(9519):1343-1351.2. Attebo K, Mitchell P, Cumming R, Smith W, Jolly N, Sparkes R. Prevalence and causes of amblyopia in an adult population. Ophthalmology. 1998;105(1):154-159. 3. Friedman DS, Repka MX, Katz J, et al. Prevalence of amblyopia and strabismus in white and African American children aged 6 through 71 months the Baltimore Pediatric Eye Disease Study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(11):2128-21 34.e1-2. 4. Birch EE. Amblyopia and binocular vision. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2013; 33:67-84. 5. Wallace DK, Repka MX, Lee KA, et al. Amblyopia Preferred Practice Pattern®. Ophthalmology. 2018;125(1):P105-P142. 6. Loudon SE, Simonsz HJ. The history of the treatment of amblyopia. Strabismus. 2005;13 (2):93-106. 7. Hess RF, Thompson B. Amblyopia and the binocular approach to its therapy. Vision Res. 2015; 114:4-16. 8. Hess RF, Mansouri B, Thompson B. A binocular approach to treating amblyopia: antisuppression therapy. Optom Vis Sci. 2010;87(9): 697-704. 9. Scheiman MM, Hertle RW, Beck RW, et al. Randomized trial of treatment of amblyopia in children aged 7 to 17 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(4):437-447. 10. Repka MX, Kraker RT, Beck RW, et al. A randomized trial of atropine vs patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia: follow-up at age 10 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126 (8): 1039-1044. 11. Repka MX, Cotter SA, Beck RW, et al. A randomized trial of atropine regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2004;111(11):2076-2085. 12. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine vs. patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(3):268-278. 13. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group Writing Committee, Rutstein RP, Quinn GE, et al. A randomized trial comparing Bangerter filters and patching for the treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2010; 117(5):998-1004.e6. 14. Menon V, Shailesh G, Sharma P, Saxena R. Clinical trial of patching versus atropine penalization for the treatment of anisometropic amblyopia in older children. J AAPOS. 2008;12 (5):493-497. 15. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. The clinical profile of moderate amblyopia in children younger than 7 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(3):281-287. 16. Felius J, Chandler DL, Holmes JM, et al. Evaluating the burden of amblyopia treatment from the parent and child's perspective. J AAPOS. 2010;14(5):389-395. 17. Foley-Nolan A, McCann A, O'Keefe M. Atropine penalisation versus occlusion as the primary treatment for amblyopia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;81(1):54-57. 18. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Impact of patching and atropine treatment on the child and family in the amblyopia treatment study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(11):1625- 1632. 19. Gürlü VP, Erda N. Amblyopia and occlusion therapies. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2011;41(4):259- 269. 20. North RV, Kelly ME. Atropine occlusion in the treatment of strabismic amblyopia and its effect upon the non-amblyopic eye. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1991;11(2):113-117. 21. Holmes JM, Lazar EL, Melia BM, et al. Effect of age on response to amblyopia treatment in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129(11): 145 1-1457. 22. Holmes JM, Melia M, Bradfield YS, Cruz OA, Forbes B; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Factors associated with recurrence of amblyopia on cessation of patching. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(8):1427-1432. 23. Bhola R, Keech RV, Kutschke P, Pfeifer W, Scott WE. Recurrence of amblyopia after occlusion therapy. Ophthalmology. 2006;113 (11):2097-2100. 24. Li T, Shotton K. Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4): CD0 06460. 25. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A comparison of atropine and patching treatments for moderate amblyopia by patient age, cause of amblyopia, depth of amblyopia, and other factors. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(8): 1632-1637; discussion 1637-1638. 26. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of prescribed patching regimens for treatment of severe amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(11):2075- 2087. 27. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group Writing Committee, Rutstein RP, Quinn GE, et al. A randomized trial comparing Bangerter filters and patching for the treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2010; 117(5):998-1004.e6. 28. Loudon SE, Fronius M, Looman CW, et al. Predictors and a remedy for noncompliance with amblyopia therapy in children measured with the occlusion dose monitor. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(10):4393-4400. 29. Al-Zuhaibi S, Al-Harthi I, Cooymans P, AlBusaidi A, Al-Farsi Y, Ganesh A. Compliance of amblyopic patients with occlusion therapy:A pilot study. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2009; 2(2):67-72. 30. Dean SE, Povey RC, Reeves J. Assessing interventions to increase compliance to patching treatment in children with amblyopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(2):159-165. 31. Repka MX, Cotter SA, Beck RW, et al. A randomized trial of atropine regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2004;111(11):2076-2085. 32. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine vs patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia: follow-up at age 10 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008; 126 (8): 1039-1044. 33. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine vs. patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(3):268-278. 34. Li T, Shotton K. Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4): CD 00 6460. 35. Menon V, Shailesh G, Sharma P, Saxena R. Clinical trial of patching versus atropine penalization for the treatment of anisometropic amblyopia in older children. J AAPOS. 2008; 12(5):493-497. 36. Foley-Nolan A, McCann A, O'Keefe M. Atropine penalisation versus occlusion as the primary treatment for amblyopia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;81(1):54-57. 37. Hess RF, Thompson B. Amblyopia and the binocular approach to its therapy. Vision Res. 2015; 114:4-16. 38. Foley-Nolan A, McCann A, O'Keefe M. Atropine penalisation versus occlusion as the primary treatment for amblyopia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;81(1):54-57. 39. Holmes JM, Lazar EL, Melia BM, et al. Effect of age on response to amblyopia treatment in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129(11):14 51-1457. 40. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A comparison of atropine and patching treatments for moderate amblyopia by patient age, cause of amblyopia, depth of amblyopia, and other factors. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(8): 16 32-1637; discussion 1637-1638. 41. Bhola R, Keech RV, Kutschke P, Pfeifer W, Scott WE. Recurrence of amblyopia after occlusion therapy. Ophthalmology. 2006;113 (11):2097-2100. 42. Holmes JM, Beck RW, Kraker RT, et al. Risk of amblyopia recurrence after cessation of treatment. J AAPOS. 2004;8(5):420-428.