METHODS: Retrospective analysis of cases. All 122 cases(244 eyes)of juvenile with myopic from September 2016 to December 2017 in our hospital were analyzed. 63 cases were corrected by orthokeratology lens and 59 cases were corrected by glasses. data of the binocular positive relative accommodation before treatment and 6mo after treatment were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS:Before treatment, the average PRA value of the orthokeratology group(-0.83±0.23)D and the average PRA value of the glasses group(-0.77±0.24)D were no significant difference(t= -1.457, P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups before treatment in eye axis(orthokeratology group 24.84±0.90mm, glasses group 24.78±0.86mm, t=0.550, P>0.05). PRA in the orthokeratology group -2.27±0.37D was significantly higher than that in the pre-treatment group -0.83±0.23D(t=37.070, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in PRA -0.83±0.24D at the end of 6mo compared with that before treatment -0.77±0.24D,(t=1.565, P>0.05). After treatment, the PRA of orthokeratology group was better than that of glasses group, and the difference was statistically significant(t=-25.271, P<0.001). The eye axis of the orthokeratology group 24.86 ±0.91mm was significantly higher than that of the control group 24.84±0.90mm(t=-2.453, P<0.05)at the end of 6mo. The eye axis of the glasses group 24.97±0.86mm was significantly different from that before treatment 24.78±0.86mm(t=39.135, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the eye axis between the orthokeratology group and the glasses group after 6mo(t=-0.932,P>0.05).

CONCLUSION: The corrected visual acuity of juvenile myopia by orthokeratology was significantly higher than that by using glasses 6mo after treatment, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in eye axis during 6mo.