 |
|
Two-Year Follow-up of a 6-Month Randomized Trial of Atropine vs Patching for Treatment of Moderate Amblyopia in Children
The Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group*
Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:149-157.
Objective To compare patching and atropine sulfate as treatments for moderate amblyopia in children 18 months after completion of a 6-month randomized trial.
Methods In a randomized, multicenter (47 sites) clinical trial, 419 children younger than 7 years with amblyopia (20/40 to 20/100 in the affected eye) were assigned to receive either patching or atropine eye drops for 6 months. Between 6 months and 2 years, treatment was at the discretion of the investigator.
Main Outcome Measure Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye and sound eye after 2 years.
Results At 2 years, visual acuity in the amblyopic eye improved from baseline a mean of 3.7 lines in the patching group and 3.6 lines in the atropine group. The difference in visual acuity between treatment groups was small: 0.01 logMAR (95% confidence interval, –0.02 to 0.04). In both treatment groups, the mean amblyopic eye acuity was approximately 20/32, 1.8 lines worse than the mean sound eye acuity, which was approximately 20/20.
Conclusions Atropine or patching for 6 months followed by best clinical care until 2 years produced similar improvement of moderate amblyopia in children between 3 and 7 years of age at enrollment. However, on average the amblyopic eye acuity was still approximately 2 lines worse than the sound eye.
*The writing committee served as author for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group (PEDIG). A complete list of writing committee members is as follows: lead authors: Michael X. Repka, MD; David K. Wallace, MD; Roy W. Beck, MD, PhD; Raymond T. Kraker, MSPH. Additional writing committee members (alphabetical): Eileen E. Birch, PhD; Susan A. Cotter, OD; Sean Donahue, MD; Donald F. Everett, MA; Richard W. Hertle, MD; Jonathan M. Holmes, BM, BCh; Graham E. Quinn, MD, MSCE; Mitchell M. Scheiman, OD; David R. Weakley, MD.
RELATED LETTERS
Contradictions in the Amblyopia Treatment Studies
Philip Lempert
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(2):285.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Contradictions in the Amblyopia Treatment Studies—Reply
Michael X. Repka, David K. Wallace, Roy W. Beck, Raymond T. Kraker, Eileen E. Birch, Susan A. Cotter, Sean Donahue, Donald F. Everett, Richard W. Hertle, Jonathan M. Holmes, Graham E. Quinn, Mitchell M. Scheiman, David R. Weakley, and for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(2):285-287.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
A Randomized Trial of Atropine vs Patching for Treatment of Moderate Amblyopia: Follow-up at Age 10 Years
Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:1039-1044.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
How Much Amblyopia Treatment Is Enough?
Repka
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:990-991.
FULL TEXT
Preverbal Photoscreening for Amblyogenic Factors and Outcomes in Amblyopia Treatment: Early Objective Screening and Visual Acuities
Kirk et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:489-492.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Progression of Intermittent, Small-Angle, and Variable Esotropia in Infancy
Fu et al.
IOVS 2007;48:661-664.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Current Concepts of Amblyopia: A Neuro-Ophthalmology Perspective
Roper-Hall
Amer. Orthoptic Jrnl. 2007;57:2-12.
ABSTRACT
Evidence-Based Amblyopia Treatment: Results of PEDIG Studies
Wallace
Amer. Orthoptic Jrnl. 2007;57:48-55.
ABSTRACT
Current Recommendations for Amblyopia Treatment
Arnoldi
Amer. Orthoptic Jrnl. 2007;57:60-67.
ABSTRACT
The John Pratt-Johnson Annual Lecture: Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group Amblyopia Treatment Review
Rees et al.
Amer. Orthoptic Jrnl. 2007;57:99-103.
ABSTRACT
Contradictions in the amblyopia treatment studies.
Lempert
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:285-285.
FULL TEXT
Contradictions in the Amblyopia Treatment Studies--Reply
Repka et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:285-287.
FULL TEXT
Concern About the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group 2-Year Follow-up Study
Kushner
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1615-1616.
FULL TEXT
From the Library
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:788-788.
FULL TEXT
|
