Long term vision outcomes of conventional treatment of strabismic and anisometropic functional amblyopia.

Pam Garoufalis, Zoran Georgievski, Konstandina Koklanis
{"title":"Long term vision outcomes of conventional treatment of strabismic and anisometropic functional amblyopia.","authors":"Pam Garoufalis,&nbsp;Zoran Georgievski,&nbsp;Konstandina Koklanis","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the long-term vision outcomes of amblyopia treatment in \"successfully\" compared with \"unsuccessfully\" treated patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-two participants (n=42, mean age 14.8 years, range 10-25 years) were enrolled in the study. Individuals with strabismic or mixed (strabismic and anisometropic) amblyopia were examined at a mean of 6.6 years (range 1-18 years) after cessation of amblyopia treatment. Participants were classified as being \"successfully\" treated (Group 1) if visual acuity of 6/7.5 or better was achieved at cessation of treatment, or \"unsuccessfully\" treated (Group 2) if visual acuity of 6/9 or less was achieved at cessation of treatment. Visual acuity was analyzed by calculating an interocular score or difference in visual acuity between the amblyopic and non amblyopic normal (control) eye.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A deterioration of visual acuity occurred in 62% of the participants in both Groups 1 and 2. The mean deterioration of visual acuity over time for either group was less than one LogMAR chart line and was not \"statistically significant\" by convention (F [1,39]=3.361, p=0.074). The outcomes achieved at cessation of treatment did not \"statistically significantly\" affect the mean deterioration that occurred over time (F [1,49]=0.031, p=0.860).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Visual acuity was relatively stable over a mean followup period of 6.6 years. The treatment outcome and the success of amblyopia treatment were found to be irrelevant to long term stability of visual acuity. These findings suggest that amblyopia treatment mostly results in a lasting improvement in visual acuity, and that both unsuccessfully and successfully treated individuals maintain their visual acuity improvement achieved during treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":79564,"journal":{"name":"Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly","volume":"22 1","pages":"49-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the long-term vision outcomes of amblyopia treatment in "successfully" compared with "unsuccessfully" treated patients.

Methods: Forty-two participants (n=42, mean age 14.8 years, range 10-25 years) were enrolled in the study. Individuals with strabismic or mixed (strabismic and anisometropic) amblyopia were examined at a mean of 6.6 years (range 1-18 years) after cessation of amblyopia treatment. Participants were classified as being "successfully" treated (Group 1) if visual acuity of 6/7.5 or better was achieved at cessation of treatment, or "unsuccessfully" treated (Group 2) if visual acuity of 6/9 or less was achieved at cessation of treatment. Visual acuity was analyzed by calculating an interocular score or difference in visual acuity between the amblyopic and non amblyopic normal (control) eye.

Results: A deterioration of visual acuity occurred in 62% of the participants in both Groups 1 and 2. The mean deterioration of visual acuity over time for either group was less than one LogMAR chart line and was not "statistically significant" by convention (F [1,39]=3.361, p=0.074). The outcomes achieved at cessation of treatment did not "statistically significantly" affect the mean deterioration that occurred over time (F [1,49]=0.031, p=0.860).

Conclusion: Visual acuity was relatively stable over a mean followup period of 6.6 years. The treatment outcome and the success of amblyopia treatment were found to be irrelevant to long term stability of visual acuity. These findings suggest that amblyopia treatment mostly results in a lasting improvement in visual acuity, and that both unsuccessfully and successfully treated individuals maintain their visual acuity improvement achieved during treatment.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
斜视和屈光参差性功能性弱视常规治疗的远期视力效果。
目的:探讨弱视治疗“成功”与“不成功”患者的长期视力情况。方法:纳入42例受试者(n=42),平均年龄14.8岁,年龄范围10-25岁。斜视或混合性(斜视和屈光参差)弱视患者在停止弱视治疗后平均6.6年(范围1-18年)接受检查。如果在停止治疗时视力达到6/7.5或更高,则将参与者分类为“成功”治疗(1组),如果在停止治疗时视力达到6/9或更低,则将参与者分类为“不成功”治疗(2组)。通过计算弱视和非弱视正常(对照)眼之间的眼间评分或视力差异来分析视力。结果:第1组和第2组有62%的受试者出现视力下降。两组患者视力随时间的平均恶化程度均小于一条LogMAR图线,按惯例没有“统计学意义”(F [1,39]=3.361, p=0.074)。停止治疗时取得的结果对随时间发生的平均恶化没有“统计学显著”影响(F [1,49]=0.031, p=0.860)。结论:平均随访6.6年,视力相对稳定。弱视的治疗效果和治疗成功与否与视力的长期稳定性无关。这些研究结果表明,弱视治疗大多会导致视力的持久改善,并且治疗失败和成功的个体都能保持在治疗期间取得的视力改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Five simple rules for treating pediatric intermitttent exotropia strabismus. Future of medicine and the profession; universal serotonin addiction? exotropia five rules; safer strabismus surgery; pinealoma; MS Corectopia. A new modfied anchored suspension-recession (so-called "hang-back" technique for high risk strabismus surgery. Isolated inferior rectus paresis with falling eye phenomenon of the contralateral eye in a patient with pineal tumor: a case report. Incidental detection of bilateral corectopia by photo screening leads to the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. A case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1