Atropine penalisation versus occlusion as the primary treatment for amblyopia. A randomized trial to evaluate 2 hours of daily patching for strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia in children. A randomized pilot study of near activities versus non-near activities during patching therapy for amblyopia. Comparative efficacy of penalization methods in moderate to mild amblyopia. A randomized trial of near versus distance activities while patching for amblyopia in children aged 3 to less than 7 years. Objectively monitored patching regimens for treatment of amblyopia: randomised trial. Computer-based training for the treatment of partial blindness. Occupational therapy treatment with right half-field eye-patching for patients with subacute stroke and unilateral neglect: a randomised controlled trial. Randomized trial of treatment of amblyopia in children aged 7 to 17 years.
Pharmacological penalisation of non-amblyopic eyes is an infrequently used alternative to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors compared the efficacy of atropine penalisation and that of occlusion as a primary treatment for amblyopia.
                Thirty six newly diagnosed patients with amblyopia were allocated to two groups for treatment. Eighteen patients in each group were treated either with atropine penalisation (group A) or occlusion therapy (group P).
                There was a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity in both groups treated. In group A improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eye was from 6/50 to 6/11 (p < 0.001). In group P improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity was from 6/60 to 6/19 (p < 0.001). In group A non-compliance with treatment was only 6% (2/18). Non-compliance in group P was 45% (8/18) at some stages of the treatment. Neither group produced an incidence of occlusion amblyopia.
                In this study atropine penalisation has been shown to be as effective as occlusion therapy in the treatment of amblyopia. Patient acceptance of atropine penalisation was superior to that for occlusion therapy as was shown by the compliance rate. Atropine treatment was also advantageous in that compliance could be readily checked by inspection. To compare 2 hours of daily patching (combined with 1 hour of concurrent near visual activities) with a control group of spectacle wear alone (if needed) for treatment of moderate to severe amblyopia in children 3 to 7 years old.
                Prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial (46 sites).
                One hundred eighty children 3 to 7 years old with best-corrected amblyopic-eye visual acuity (VA) of 20/40 to 20/400 associated with strabismus, anisometropia, or both who had worn optimal refractive correction (if needed) for at least 16 weeks or for 2 consecutive visits without improvement.
                Randomization either to 2 hours of daily patching with 1 hour of near visual activities or to spectacles alone (if needed). Patients were continued on the randomized treatment (or no treatment) until no further improvement was noted.
                Best-corrected VA in the amblyopic eye after 5 weeks.
                Improvement in VA of the amblyopic eye from baseline to 5 weeks averaged 1.1 lines in the patching group and 0.5 lines in the control group (P = 0.006), and improvement from baseline to best measured VA at any visit averaged 2.2 lines in the patching group and 1.3 lines in the control group (P<0.001).
                After a period of treatment with spectacles, 2 hours of daily patching combined with 1 hour of near visual activities modestly improves moderate to severe amblyopia in children 3 to 7 years old. To plan a future randomized clinical trial, we conducted a pilot study to determine whether children randomized to near or non-near activities would perform prescribed activities. A secondary aim was to obtain a preliminary estimate of the effect of near versus non-near activities on amblyopic eye visual acuity, when combined with 2 hours of daily patching.
                Sixty-four children, 3 to less than 7 years of age, with anisometropic, strabismic, or combined amblyopia (20/40 to 20/400) were randomly assigned to receive either 2 hours of daily patching with near activities or 2 hours of daily patching without near activities. Parents completed daily calendars for 4 weeks recording the activities performed while patched and received a weekly telephone call in which they were asked to describe the activities performed during the previous 2 hours of patching. Visual acuity was assessed at 4 weeks.
                The children assigned to near visual activities performed more near activities than those assigned to non-near activities (by calendars, mean 1.6 +/- 0.5 hours versus 0.2 +/- 0.2 hours daily, P < 0.001; by telephone interviews, 1.6 +/- 0.4 hours versus 0.4 +/- 0.5 hours daily, P < 0.001). After 4 weeks of treatment, there was a suggestion of greater improvement in amblyopic eye visual acuity in those assigned to near visual activities (mean 2.6 lines versus 1.6 lines, P = 0.07). The treatment group difference in visual acuity was present for patients with severe amblyopia but not moderate amblyopia.
                Children patched and instructed to perform near activities for amblyopia spent more time performing those near activities than children who were instructed to perform non-near activities. Our results suggest that performing near activities while patched may be beneficial in treating amblyopia. Based on our data, a formal randomized amblyopia treatment trial of patching with and without near activities is both feasible and desirable. To compare the efficacy and sensory outcome of pharmacologic and optical penalization in the treatment of moderate to mild amblyopia.
                Randomized clinical trial.
                In an institutional setting, two- to 10-year-old children with strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia (visual acuity in the amblyopic eye at least 20/60) who were cooperative to measure visual acuity using the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) crowded Glasgow acuity cards were randomized into two groups of therapy (n=35 in each group), 1% atropine, and optical penalization with positive lenses, after stratification by cause of amblyopia. Visual acuity was tested by the logMAR crowded Glasgow acuity cards, after retinoscopic refraction, and deviation angle were measured by the simultaneous prism and cover or Krimsky test. Stereoacuity was determined using the Titmus fly test and Randot preschool or Randot circles stereoacuity test. Change in visual acuity of the amblyopic eye and in interocular difference of visual acuity after six months of amblyopia therapy was the main outcome measure; stereoacuity at six months of therapy was a secondary outcome measure.
                Thirty-one and 32 children completed the outcome examination in the atropine and optical penalization group, respectively. Average improvement in visual acuity of the amblyopic eye was larger in the atropine than in the optical penalization group (3.4 and 1.8 logMAR lines, respectively), as well as average improvement in interocular difference of visual acuity (2.8 and 1.3 logMAR lines, respectively). Better stereoacuity, but nonsignificantly different, was detected in the atropine group.
                Atropine penalization may be considered more effective than optical penalization with positive lenses. To determine whether performing near activities while patching for amblyopia enhances improvement in visual acuity.
                Randomized clinical trial.
                A total of 425 children, aged 3 to <7 years, with amblyopia (20/40-20/400) that was caused by anisometropia, strabismus, or both, and that persisted after treatment with spectacles.
                Children were randomized to 2 hours of patching per day with near activities or 2 hours of patching per day with distance activities. Instruction sheets describing common near and distance activities were given to the parents. Study visits were scheduled at 2, 5, 8, and 17 weeks. In weeks without a visit, weekly telephone calls were made to the parent to monitor and encourage compliance during the first 8 weeks.
                Masked assessment of visual acuity by isolated crowded HOTV optotypes at 8 weeks.
                At 8 weeks, improvement in amblyopic eye visual acuity averaged 2.6 lines in the distance activities group and 2.5 lines in the near activities group (mean difference in acuity between groups, adjusted for baseline acuity, 0.0 lines 95% confidence interval, -0.3 to 0.3). The 2 groups also appeared statistically similar at the 2-, 5-, and 17-week visits. At the 17-week examination, children with severe amblyopia improved a mean of 3.6 lines with 2 hours of daily patching.
                Performing common near activities does not improve visual acuity outcome when treating anisometropic, strabismic, or combined amblyopia with 2 hours of daily patching. Children with severe amblyopia may respond to 2 hours of daily patching. To compare visual outcome in response to two prescribed rates of occlusion (six hours a day and 12 hours a day).
                Unmasked randomised trial.
                Research clinics in two London hospitals.
                97 children with a confirmed diagnosis of amblyopia associated with strabismus, anisometropia, or both.
                18 week period of wearing glasses (refractive adaptation) followed by occlusion prescribed ("patching") for six or 12 hours a day.
                Visual acuity measured by logMAR letter recognition; objectively monitored rate of occlusion (hours a day).
                The mean age of children at study entry was 5.6 (SD 1.5) years. Ninety were eligible for occlusion but 10 dropped out in this phase, leaving 80 children who were randomised to a prescribed dose rate of six (n=40) or 12 (n=40) hours a day. The mean change in visual acuity of the amblyopic eye was not significantly different (P=0.64) between the two groups (0.26 (95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.31) log units in six hour group; 0.24 (0.19 to 0.29) log units in 12 hour group). The mean dose rates (hours a day) actually received, however, were also not significantly different (4.2 (3.7 to 4.7) in six hour group v 6.2 (5.1 to 7.3) in 12 hour group; P=0.06). The visual outcome was similar for those children who received three to six hours a day or more than six to 12 hours a day, but significantly better than that in children who received less than three hours a day. Children aged under 4 required significantly less occlusion than older children. Visual outcome was not influenced by type of amblyopia.
                Substantial (six hours a day) and maximal (12 hours a day) prescribed occlusion results in similar visual outcome. On average, the occlusion dose received in the maximal group was only 50% more than in the substantial group and in both groups was much less than that prescribed. Younger children required the least occlusion.
                Clinical Trials NCT00274664. Partial blindness after brain injury has been considered non-treatable. To evaluate whether patients with visual-field defects can profit from computer-based visual restitution training (VRT), two independent clinical trials were conducted using patients with optic nerve (n = 19) or post-chiasmatic brain injury (n = 19). In post-chiasma patients, VRT led to a significant improvement (29.4%) over baseline in the ability to detect visual stimuli; in optic nerve patients, the effects were even more pronounced (73.6% improvement). Visual-field enlargements were confirmed by the observation of a visual-field expansion of 4.9 degrees-5.8 degrees of visual angle and improved acuity in optic nerve patients. Ninety five percent of the VRT-treated patients showed improvements, 72.2% confirmed visual improvements subjectively. Patients receiving a placebo training did not show comparable improvements. In conclusion, VRT with a computer program improves vision in patients with visual-field defects and offers a new, cost-effective therapy for partial blindness. The right half-field eye-patching technique has been reported to be effective in reducing unilateral neglect (UN) and improving functional ability in stroke patients. This study investigated the efficacy of conventional treatment with right half-field eye patching in treating subacute stroke patients with UN, using a randomised controlled trial.
                Thirty-five inpatients with subacute stroke were recruited and randomised into intervention and control groups. The patients in the intervention group received 4 weeks of conventional occupational therapy with modified right half-field eye-patching. Those in the control group received 4 weeks of conventional treatment only. Assessors, who were blind to the treatments, assessed the groups using the Behavioural Inattention Test (BIT) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) on admission and at 4 weeks.
                Patients treated with right half-field eye-patching had significantly (p = 0.046) higher BIT gain (mean = 25.06, SD = 30.81) than those treated with the conventional treatment (mean = 8.29, SD = 10.35). There was no significant difference (p = 0.467) in FIM gain between patients in both groups.
                Right half-field eye-patching improved stroke patients' impairment level in terms of UN, but the potential benefits in impairment tests were not confirmed by improvements in function. To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment of amblyopia in children aged 7 to 17 years.
                At 49 clinical sites, 507 patients with amblyopic eye visual acuity ranging from 20/40 to 20/400 were provided with optimal optical correction and then randomized to a treatment group (2-6 hours per day of prescribed patching combined with near visual activities for all patients plus atropine sulfate for children aged 7 to 12 years) or an optical correction group (optical correction alone). Patients whose amblyopic eye acuity improved 10 or more letters (> or =2 lines) by 24 weeks were considered responders.
                In the 7- to 12-year-olds (n = 404), 53% of the treatment group were responders compared with 25% of the optical correction group (P<.001). In the 13- to 17-year-olds (n = 103), the responder rates were 25% and 23%, respectively, overall (adjusted P = .22) but 47% and 20%, respectively, among patients not previously treated with patching and/or atropine for amblyopia (adjusted P = .03). Most patients, including responders, were left with a residual visual acuity deficit.
                Amblyopia improves with optical correction alone in about one fourth of patients aged 7 to 17 years, although most patients who are initially treated with optical correction alone will require additional treatment for amblyopia. For patients aged 7 to 12 years, prescribing 2 to 6 hours per day of patching with near visual activities and atropine can improve visual acuity even if the amblyopia has been previously treated. For patients 13 to 17 years, prescribing patching 2 to 6 hours per day with near visual activities may improve visual acuity when amblyopia has not been previously treated but appears to be of little benefit if amblyopia was previously treated with patching. We do not yet know whether visual acuity improvement will be sustained once treatment is discontinued; therefore, conclusions regarding the long-term benefit of treatment and the development of treatment recommendations for amblyopia in children 7 years and older await the results of a follow-up study we are conducting on the patients who responded to treatment.
Occlusion, whilst wearing necessary refractive correction, appears to be more effective than refractive correction alone in the treatment of strabismic amblyopia. The benefit of combining near activities with occlusion is unproven. No RCTs were found that assessed the role of either partial occlusion or optical penalisation to refractive correction for strabismic amblyopia.