Non-Interactive Amblyopia Treatment Modalities in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Résumé

Abstract Background: This review aimed to identify the most effective and safest amblyopia interventions in an integrative manner.Methods: Eligible studies were identified from Cochrane library (CENTRAL), Pubmed central, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and Scopus database up to 09/2018. Data pooling was performed for trials with a little heterogeneity (P>0.05, I2 <50%) using the fixed-effect models. The mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) at 95% confidence interval (CI) for visual acuity improvement, success of the treatment, reverse amblyopia and adherence rate were pooled.Results: Eight trials consisting of 1253 participants were included. Regardless of child’s age, cause and severity of amblyopia, six hours patching and full-time patching were equally effective (Pooled MD, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.55). Likewise, studies independently reported that two hours and six hours patching were equally effective for moderate amblyopia. The therapeutic outcome of patching was statistically comparable to atropine (pooled MD, 0.25 lines; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.48). The weighted adherence rates for atropine was encouraging as compared to patching (pooled RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.96). However, significant reverse amblyopia and poor adherence was recognized in full-time patching and atropine. The risk of developing reverse amblyopia was lower by 19% for patching groups as compared to atropine (pooled RR, 0.19; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.57). Conclusion: Overall, considering six hours patching or atropine penalization as a first line treatment is a fair decision from effectiveness perspective but it should be under proactive monitoring to optimize the noted adherence and adverse effects issues.

Citer ce document

Accès au document

Ce document est hébergé sur son dépôt institutionnel d'origine.

Auteur(s)

Statistiques

Consultations : 1

Téléchargements : 0