Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tailor V
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6718221 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years.
Tailor Vijay V Bossi Manuela M Bunce Catey C Greenwood John A JA Dahlmann-Noor Annegret A
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20150811 8
<h4>Background</h4>Current treatments for amblyopia in children, occlusion and pharmacological blurring, have had limited success, with less than two-thirds of children achieving good visual acuity of at least 0.20 logMAR in the amblyopic eye, limited improvement of stereopsis, and poor compliance. A new treatment approach, based on the dichoptic presentation of movies or computer games (images presented separately to each eye), may yield better results, as it aims to balance the input of visual ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8819728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the safety of dichoptic balanced binocular viewing (BBV) for amblyopia in children, plus feasibility, adherence, acceptability, trial methodology and clinical measures of visual function.DesignWe carried out an observer-masked parallel-group phase 2a feasibility randomised controlled trial.SettingTwo study sites, a secondary/tertiary and a community site.ParticipantsWe enrolled 32 children aged 3-8 years with unilateral amblyopia who had completed optical adaptation where indicated. 20 children attended the 16-week exit visit (retention 63%).InterventionsChildren were randomised to BBV (movies customised to interocular acuity difference at baseline) for 1 hour a day (active intervention) or standard management as per parental choice (part-time occlusion or atropine blurring, control). All interventions were used at home, daily for 16 weeks.Primary outcome measure'VacMan suppression test' of interocular balance at 16 weeks from randomisation.Secondary outcome measuresfeasibility outcomes (recruitment and retention ratios, adherence with the allocated intervention); safety outcomes at other time points (changes in prevalence of diplopia, manifest strabismus, suppression/interocular balance on a range of tests); efficacy outcomes (clinical measures of visual function, such as best-corrected visual acuity, BCVA). Outcome measures were identical to those planned in the protocol.ResultsPrimary outcome: At baseline, values for the interocular balance point were higher (indicating greater suppression of the amblyopic eye) in the occlusion group than in the BBV group. These values shifted downwards on average for the occlusion group, significantly decreasing from baseline to week 16 (t8=4.49, p=0.002). Balance values did not change between baseline and week 16 for the BBV group (t9=-0.82, p=0.435). At 16 weeks, there was no statistical difference in interocular balance/suppression change over time between the two arms. The difference at follow-up between the arms, adjusted for baseline, was -0.02 (95% CI -0.28 to 0.23, p=0.87).FeasibilityWe prescreened 144 records of potentially eligible children. Between 28 October 2019 and 31 July 2021, including an interruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 32 children were screened and randomised (recruitment rate 22%), 16 to BBV and 16 to standard treatment. 20 children attended the 16-week exit visit (retention 63%). Mean adherence with BBV as proportion of viewing time prescribed was 56.1% (SD36) at 8 and 57.9% (SD 30.2) at 16 weeks. Mean adherence with prescribed occlusion time was 90.1% (SD 19.7) at 8 and 59.2% (SD 24.8) at 16 weeks.Secondary safety/efficacy outcomesOne child in the BBV arm reported transient double vision, which resolved; two reported headaches, which led to withdrawal. BCVA improved from mean 0.47 (SD0.18) logMAR at randomisation to 0.26 (0.14) with standard treatment, and from 0.55 (0.28) to 0.32 (0.26) with BBV. Outcomes at 16 weeks did not differ between treatments.Participant experienceFamilies were generally positive about BBV, but families found both patching and BBV difficult to integrate into family routines.ConclusionsRecruitment rates indicate that a future phase 3 trial will require multiple sites or a longer enrolment period. Retention and adherence rates were lower than anticipated, which will influence future study designs. Dichoptic treatment may be equal to occlusion treatment in safety and efficacy; headaches may lead to discontinuation. Integration into family routines may constitute a barrier to implementation.Trial registration numberNCT03754153.
| S-EPMC11407205 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SignificanceBinocular treatment for unilateral amblyopia is an emerging treatment that requires evaluation through a randomized clinical trial.PurposeThis study aimed to compare change in amblyopic-eye visual acuity (VA) in children aged 4 to 6 years treated with the dichoptic binocular iPad (Apple, Cupertino, CA) game, Dig Rush (not yet commercially available; Ubisoft, Montreal, Canada), plus continued spectacle correction versus continued spectacle correction alone.MethodsChildren (mean age, 5.7 years) were randomly assigned to home treatment for 8 weeks with the iPad game (prescribed 1 h/d, 5 d/wk [n = 92], or continued spectacle correction alone [n = 90]) in a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Before enrollment, children wearing spectacles were required to have at least 16 weeks of wear or no improvement in amblyopic-eye VA (<0.1 logMAR) for at least 8 weeks. Outcome was change in amblyopic-eye VA from baseline to 4 weeks (primary) and 8 weeks (secondary) assessed by masked examiner.ResultsA total of 182 children with anisometropic (63%), strabismic (16%; <5∆ near, simultaneous prism and cover test), or combined-mechanism (20%) amblyopia (20/40 to 20/200; mean, 20/63) were enrolled. After 4 weeks, mean amblyopic VA improved by 1.1 logMAR lines with binocular treatment and 0.6 logMAR lines with spectacles alone (adjusted difference, 0.5 lines; 95.1% confidence interval [CI], 0.1 to 0.9). After 8 weeks, results (binocular treatment: mean amblyopic-eye VA improvement, 1.3 vs. 1.0 logMAR lines with spectacles alone; adjusted difference, 0.3 lines; 98.4% CI, -0.2 to 0.8 lines) were inconclusive because the CI included both zero and the pre-defined difference in mean VA change of 0.75 logMAR lines.ConclusionsIn 4- to 6-year-old children with amblyopia, binocular Dig Rush treatment resulted in greater improvement in amblyopic-eye VA for 4 weeks but not 8 weeks. Future work is required to determine if modifications to the contrast increment algorithm or other aspects of the game or its implementation could enhance the treatment effect.
| S-EPMC8919092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare visual acuity (VA) improvement in children aged 7 to 12 years with amblyopia treated with a binocular iPad game plus continued spectacle correction vs. continued spectacle correction alone.DesignMulticenter randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsOne hundred thirty-eight participants aged 7 to 12 years with amblyopia (33-72 letters, i.e., approximately 20/200 to 20/40) resulting from strabismus, anisometropia, or both. Participants were required to have at least 16 weeks of optical treatment in spectacles if needed or demonstrate no improvement in amblyopic-eye visual acuity (VA) for at least 8 weeks prior to enrollment.MethodsEligible participants (mean age 9.6 years, mean baseline VA of 59.6 letters, history of prior amblyopia treatment other than spectacles in 96%) were randomly assigned to treatment for 8 weeks with the dichoptic binocular Dig Rush iPad game (prescribed for 1 hour per day 5 days per week) plus spectacle wear if needed (n = 69) or continued spectacle correction alone if needed (n = 69).Main outcome measuresChange in amblyopic-eye VA from baseline to 4 weeks, assessed by a masked examiner.ResultsAt 4 weeks, mean amblyopic-eye VA letter score improved from baseline by 1.3 (2-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-2.6; 0.026 logMAR) with binocular treatment and by 1.7 (2-sided 95% CI: 0.4-3.0; 0.034 logMAR) with continued spectacle correction alone. After adjusment for baseline VA, the letter score difference between groups (binocular minus control) was -0.3 (95% CI: -2.2 to 1.5, P = 0.71, difference of -0.006 logMAR). No difference in letter scores was observed between groups when the analysis was repeated after 8 weeks of treatment (adjusted mean: -0.1, 98.3% CI: -2.4 to 2.1). For the binocular group, adherence data from the iPad indicated that slightly more than half of the participants (58% and 56%) completed >75% of prescribed treatment by the 4- and 8-week visits, respectively.ConclusionsIn children aged 7 to 12 years who have received previous treatment for amblyopia other than spectacles, there was no benefit to VA or stereoacuity from 4 or 8 weeks of treatment with the dichoptic binocular Dig Rush iPad game.
| S-EPMC6402824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe reported that in our previous study that wearing intermittent occlusion therapy glasses (IO-therapy) for 4 hours (h) was non-inferior to patching for 2 h in 3 to 8-year-old children with amblyopia. We hypothesize that an intense regimen of 12-h IO-therapy per day for 4 weeks could be as effective as the standard regimen of 4-h IO-therapy per day for 12 weeks in treating moderate amblyopia in 3 to 8-year-old children.Methods/designA total of 56 children between 3 and 8 years of age with amblyopia in association with anisometropia and/or strabismus will be enrolled. All participants will be prescribed IO-therapy glasses (Amblyz™), set at 30-s opaque/transparent intervals (i.e., occluded 50% of wear time). They will be randomized to receive the standard regimen for 12 weeks or the intense regimen for 4 weeks. Adherence to using the IO-therapy glasses will be objectively monitored in each participant by means of a microsensor dose monitor. The primary study objective is to compare the effectiveness of an intense regimen to a standard regimen of IO-therapy in 3 to 8-year-old children with moderate amblyopia. The secondary study objectives are to determine whether adherence differs between an intense regimen and a standard regimen of IO-therapy, and to determine the dose-response relationship of IO-therapy.DiscussionIn addition to testing the effectiveness, this study will test for the first time the association between treatment adherence and the visual outcome of IO-therapy, which will enhance our understanding of the dose-response relationship of IO-therapy. If an intense regimen is shown to be effective, it would alter amblyopia treatment strategies and improve visual outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02767856. Registered on 10 May 2016.
| S-EPMC7189599 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Amblyopia is the most common cause of monocular visual loss in children, affecting 1.3%-3.6% of children. Current treatments are effective in reducing the visual acuity deficit but many amblyopic individuals are left with residual visual acuity deficits, ocular motor abnormalities, deficient fine motor skills, and risk for recurrent amblyopia. Using a combination of psychophysical, electrophysiological, imaging, risk factor analysis, and fine motor skill assessment, the primary role of binocular dysfunction in the genesis of amblyopia and the constellation of visual and motor deficits that accompany the visual acuity deficit has been identified. These findings motivated us to evaluate a new, binocular approach to amblyopia treatment with the goals of reducing or eliminating residual and recurrent amblyopia and of improving the deficient ocular motor function and fine motor skills that accompany amblyopia.
| S-EPMC3577063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare visual acuity (VA) improvement in teenagers with amblyopia treated with a binocular iPad game vs part-time patching.MethodsOne hundred participants aged 13 to <17 years (mean 14.3 years) with amblyopia (20/40 to 20/200, mean ∼20/63) resulting from strabismus, anisometropia, or both were enrolled into a randomized clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment for 16 weeks of either a binocular iPad game prescribed for 1 hour per day (n = 40) or patching of the fellow eye prescribed for 2 hours per day (n = 60). The main outcome measure was change in amblyopic eye VA from baseline to 16 weeks.ResultsMean amblyopic eye VA improved from baseline by 3.5 letters (2-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-5.7 letters) in the binocular group and by 6.5 letters (2-sided 95% CI: 4.4-8.5 letters) in the patching group. After adjusting for baseline VA, the difference between the binocular and patching groups was -2.7 letters (95% CI: -5.7 to 0.3 letters, P = .082) or 0.5 lines, favoring patching. In the binocular group, treatment adherence data from the iPad device indicated that only 13% of participants completed >75% of prescribed treatment.ConclusionsIn teenagers aged 13 to <17 years, improvement in amblyopic eye VA with the binocular iPad game used in this study was not found to be better than patching, and was possibly worse. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the minimal treatment response to binocular treatment was owing to poor treatment adherence or lack of treatment effect.
| S-EPMC6206863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAmblyopia is a common cause of visual impairment in children. Compliance with traditional treatments for amblyopia is challenging due to negative psychosocial impacts. Recent shifts in amblyopia treatment have moved from suppressing the dominant eye to enhancing binocular visual function. Binocular digital therapy has become a promising approach.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of binocular gamified digital therapy on visual acuity and stereoacuity (SA) in children with unilateral amblyopia.MethodsThis pilot prospective study enrolled 11 children aged 4-6 years with unilateral amblyopia. Following at least 8 weeks of refractive correction, participants underwent binocular gamified digital therapy for 60 minutes per day, 5 days a week. The therapy used a roguelike shooting game delivered under binocular conditions through two independent channels with a real-time artificial intelligence visual engine. Assessments of distance visual acuity (DVA), near visual acuity (NVA), and SA were conducted at baseline and again at 4, 8, and 12 weeks.ResultsAt 12 weeks, the following significant improvements were noted: amblyopic eye DVA improved by 1.0 line (P=.01; d=0.77), binocular DVA improved by 0.7 lines (P=.006; d=1.00), and SA improved by 0.3 logarithm (log) arcseconds (P=.01; d=0.97). At 8 weeks, improvements included amblyopic eye DVA by 0.9 lines (P=.046; d=1.00) and SA by 0.28 log arcseconds (P=.02; d=0.90). No significant adverse events were observed, although one participant developed progressive esotropia.ConclusionsBinocular gamified digital therapy is effective and safe for improving visual outcomes in children aged 4-6 years with unilateral amblyopia.
| S-EPMC11756835 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTreatments for amblyopia, the most common vision deficit in children, often have suboptimal results. Occlusion/atropine blurring are fraught with poor adherence, regression and recurrence. These interventions target only the amblyopic eye, failing to address imbalances of cortical input from the two eyes ('suppression'). Dichoptic treatments manipulate binocular visual experience to rebalance input. Poor adherence in early trials of dichoptic therapies inspired our development of balanced binocular viewing (BBV), using movies as child-friendly viewable content. Small observational studies indicate good adherence and efficacy. A feasibility trial is needed to further test safety and gather information to design a full trial.Methods/analysisWe will carry out an observer-masked parallel-group phase 2a feasibility randomised controlled trial at two sites, randomising 44 children aged 3-8 years with unilateral amblyopia to either BBV or standard occlusion/atropine blurring, with 1:1 allocation ratio. We will assess visual function at baseline, 8 and 16 weeks. The primary outcome is intervention safety at 16 weeks, measured as change in interocular suppression, considered to precede the onset of potential diplopia. Secondary outcomes include safety at other time points, eligibility, recruitment/retention rates, adherence, clinical outcomes. We will summarise baseline characteristics for each group and assess the treatment effect using analysis of covariance. We will compare continuous clinical secondary endpoints between arms using linear mixed effect models, and report feasibility endpoints using descriptive statistics.Ethics/disseminationThis trial has been approved by the London-Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee (18/LO/1204), National Health Service Health Research Authority and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. A lay advisory group will be involved with advising on and disseminating the results to non-professional audiences, including on websites of funder/participating institutions and inputting on healthcare professional audience children would like us to reach. Reporting to clinicians and scientists will be via internal and external meetings/conferences and peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03754153.
| S-EPMC9131062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeChildhood amblyopia can be treated with binocular games or movies that rebalance contrast between the eyes, which is thought to reduce depth of interocular suppression so the child can experience binocular vision. While visual acuity gains have been reported following binocular treatment, studies rarely report gains in binocular outcomes (i.e., stereoacuity, suppression) in amblyopic children. Here, we evaluated binocular outcomes in children who had received binocular treatment for childhood amblyopia.MethodsData for amblyopic children enrolled in two ongoing studies were pooled. The sample included 41 amblyopic children (6 strabismic, 21 anisometropic, 14 combined; age 4-10 years; ≤4 prism diopters [PD]) who received binocular treatment (20 game, 21 movies; prescribed 9-10 hours treatment). Amblyopic eye visual acuity and binocular outcomes (Randot Preschool Stereoacuity, extent of suppression, and depth of suppression) were assessed at baseline and at 2 weeks.ResultsMean amblyopic eye visual acuity (P < 0.001) and mean stereoacuity improved (P = 0.045), and mean extent (P = 0.005) and depth of suppression (P = 0.003) were reduced from baseline at the 2-week visit (87% game adherence, 100% movie adherence). Depth of suppression was reduced more in children aged <8 years than in those aged ≥8 years (P = 0.004). Worse baseline depth of suppression was correlated with a larger depth of suppression reduction at 2 weeks (P = 0.001).ConclusionsAfter 2 weeks, binocular treatment in amblyopic children improved visual acuity and binocular outcomes, reducing the extent and depth of suppression and improving stereoacuity. Binocular treatments that rebalance contrast to overcome suppression are a promising additional option for treating amblyopia.
| S-EPMC5839256 | biostudies-literature