Comparison of Results after Daily Patching and Alternate-Day Patching to Treat Amblyopia.
10.3341/jkos.2015.56.2.254
- Author:
Moses KIM
1
;
Mi Young CHOI
Author Information
1. Department of Ophthalmology, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Korea. mychoi@chungbuk.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Randomized Controlled Trial ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Alternate-day patching;
Amblyopia;
Daily patching
- MeSH:
Amblyopia*;
Child;
Compliance;
Eyeglasses;
Humans;
Outcome Assessment (Health Care);
Parents;
Visual Acuity
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2015;56(2):254-262
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We compared the results of daily patching and alternate-day patching to treat amblyopia. METHODS: Patients with difference in the visual acuity (VA) between the eyes of at least two lines were prescribed spectacles according to the result of cycloplegic refraction. After 4 months, 45 patients with confirmed amblyopia were randomly assigned to daily patching or alternate-day patching group. Patients were patched daily in the daily patching group (n = 24), and patched every other day in another group. The patching time was 2-6 hours according to the VA of the amblyopic eye. The parents were asked to mark on a calendar whether their child performed occlusion or not. The main outcome measure was the mean VA of amblyopic eye and compliance of occlusion after 1, 3, 6 and 9 months. The success of treatment was defined if difference of VA between the eyes was less than or equal to 1 line. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, type of amblyopia, VA of the amblyopic eye and total treatment duration. VA of the amblyopic eye was significantly improved at 1 month after occlusion in both groups. At the final visit in both groups, the number of improved VA lines in the amblyopic eye (3.8 lines:3.7 lines, p = 0.754), the final success rate (50.0%:81.0%, p = 0.060) and the compliance of occlusion (94.5%:96.3%, p = 0.803) were not different significantly, but VA of the amblyopic eye (0.2 log MAR:0.1 log MAR, p = 0.042) was better in the alternate-day patching group than that in another group. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the number of improved VA lines in the amblyopic eye, nor were there differences in success rate and compliance of occlusion between the two groups. The final VA was better in the alternate-day patching group than another group. Therefore, the alternate-day patching method is another possible option for the treatment of amblyopia.
