Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lawrenson JG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9933422 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Lawrenson John G JG Shah Rakhee R Huntjens Byki B Downie Laura E LE Virgili Gianni G Dhakal Rohit R Verkicharla Pavan K PK Li Dongfeng D Mavi Sonia S Kernohan Ashleigh A Li Tianjing T Walline Jeffrey J JJ
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20230216
<h4>Background</h4>Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global public health problem, in terms of rates of uncorrected refractive error and significantly, an increased risk of visual impairment due to myopia-related ocular morbidity. Since myopia is usually detected in children before 10 years of age and can progress rapidly, interventions to slow its progression need to be ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTo analyse and compare the efficacy of different interventions for myopia prevention and control in children.MethodsWe searched CNKI, VIP, Wan-Fang, CBM, Chinese Clinical Registry, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to July 2022. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included interventions to slow myopia progression in children. The main outcomes included mean annual change in axial length (AL) (millimetres/year) and in refraction (R) (dioptres/year).ResultsA total of 80 RCTs (27103 eyes) were included. In comparison with control, orthokeratology (AL, -0.36 [-0.53, -0.20], P < 0.05; R, 0.56 [0.34, 0.77], P < 0.05), 1%Atropine (AL, -0.39 [-0.65, -0.13], P < 0.05; R, 0.54 [0.31, 0.77], P < 0.05), 0.01%Atropine + orthokeratology (AL, -0.47 [-0.80, -0.14], P < 0.05; R, 0.81 [0.43, 1.20], P < 0.05) could significantly slow the progression of myopia; in addition, progressive multi-focal spectacle lenses (PMSL) (0.42, [0.06, 0.79], P < 0.05), bifocal soft contact lenses (0.40, [0.03, 0.77], P < 0.05), 0.5%Atropine (0.67 [0.25, 1.10], P < 0.05), 0.1%Atropine (0.42 [0.15, 0.71], P < 0.05), 0.05%Atropine (0.57 [0.28, 0.86], P < 0.05), 0.01%Atropine (0.33 [0.15, 0.52], P < 0.05), 1%Atropine + bifocal spectacle lenses (BSL) (1.30 [0.54, 2.00], P < 0.05), 1%Atropine + PMSL (0.66 [0.23, 1.10], P < 0.05), 0.01%Atropine + single vision spectacle lenses (SVSL) (0.70 [0.23, 1.10], P < 0.05), 0.01%Atropine + orthokeratology (0.81 [0.43, 1.20], P < 0.05), BSL + Massage (0.85 [0.22, 1.50], P < 0.05), SVSL + Red light (0.59 [0.06, 0.79], P < 0.05) showed significant slowing effect on the increase in R.ConclusionsThis network meta-analysis suggests that the combined measures were most effective in AL and R, followed by Atropine.
| S-EPMC10630522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of myopia prevention methods in children without pre-existing myopia. Methods: A network meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Comprehensive searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. The analysis focused on randomized controlled trials evaluating myopia prevention strategies in children without prior myopia. Primary outcomes included annual changes in refraction and axial length, while secondary outcomes encompassed myopia incidence and adverse events. Effect sizes were reported as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data synthesis utilized a random-effects model under a frequentist framework, with intervention efficacy ranked by P-scores. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and robustness was ensured via sensitivity and consistency analyses. Results: Low-level red light therapy and low-dose atropine were the most effective interventions for reducing refractive progression (MD: 0.48 D, 95% CI: 0.38-0.59 D; MD: 0.33 D, 95% CI: 0.23-0.43 D) and axial elongation (MD: -0.23 mm, 95% CI: -0.27 to -0.19 mm; MD: -0.12 mm, 95% CI: -0.16 to -0.08 mm). In addition, both significantly lowered myopia incidence (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.45-0.79; RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.41-0.75). Outdoor activities and myopia awareness programs demonstrated moderate efficacy. Adverse events, including photophobia and dry eyes, were minor and self-limiting, with no serious complications reported. Conclusions: Low-level red light therapy and low-dose atropine are the most effective, generally safe strategies for preventing myopia in at-risk children without myopia, while a non-invasive approach, outdoor activities, provides moderate benefits.
| S-EPMC11900620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite high discontinuation rates for myopia optical interventions, limited attention has been given to the potential rebound effects post-discontinuation. This systematic review aims to assess the extent of the rebound effects following the cessation of common clinical optical myopia-control interventions in children. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from inception to October 2023. The rebound effects, defined as changes in the axial length or spherical equivalent during and after treatment cessation, were categorized into four levels. These studies encompassed 703 participants and spanned from 2019 to 2023, with durations of treatment and cessation ranging from 6 months to 3.5 years and from 2 weeks to 5 years, respectively. This review, encompassing 14 studies, revealed a predominant strong rebound effect in orthokeratology (8 studies), a weak rebound effect in multifocal soft contact lenses (4 studies), and a variable rebound effect in peripheral-plus spectacle lenses (2 studies). Notably, with the increasing cessation duration, the rebound effects diminished, potentially linked to the reversal of choroidal thickening and the disappearance of peripheral myopic defocus. In conclusion, a temporal trend of rebound effects exists in all three myopia optical interventions, possibly contributing to their myopia control mechanisms.
| S-EPMC10779574 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIncreased prevalence of myopia is a major public health challenge worldwide, including in Africa. While previous studies have shown an increasing prevalence in Africa, there is no collective review of evidence on the magnitude of myopia in African school children. Hence, this study reviews the evidence and provides a meta-analysis of the prevalence of myopia in African school children.MethodsThis review was conducted using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five computerized bibliographic databases, PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Africa Index Medicus were searched for published studies on the prevalence of myopia in Africa from 1 January 2000 to 18 August 2021. Studies were assessed for methodological quality. Data were gathered by gender, age and refraction technique and standardized to the definition of myopia as refractive error ≥ 0.50 diopter. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the prevalence. Significant heterogeneity was detected among the various studies (I2 >50%), hence a random effect model was used, and sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the effects of outliers.ResultsWe included data from 24 quality assessed studies, covering 36,395 African children. The overall crude prevalence of myopia over the last two decades is 4.7% (95% CI, 3.9-5.7) in African children. Although the prevalence of myopia was slightly higher in females (5.3%, 95%CI: 4.1, 6.5) than in males (3.7%, 95% CI, 2.6-4.7; p = 0.297) and higher in older [12-18 years 5.1% (95% CI, 3.8-6.3) than younger children (aged 5-11 years, 3.4%, 95% CI, 2.5-4.4; p = 0.091), the differences were not significant. There was a significantly lower prevalence of myopia with cycloplegic compared with non-cycloplegic refraction [4.2%, 95%CI: 3.3, 5.1 versus 6.4%, 95%CI: 4.4, 8.4; p = 0.046].ConclusionsOur results showed that myopia affects about one in twenty African schoolchildren, and it is overestimated in non-cycloplegic refraction. Clinical interventions to reduce the prevalence of myopia in the region should target females, and school children who are aged 12-18 years.
| S-EPMC8812871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMyopia is a common visual disorder with increasing prevalence among developed countries of the world. Myopia constitutes a substantial risk factor for several ocular conditions that can lead to blindness. The purpose of this study is to conduct an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in order to identify and appraise robust research evidence regarding the management of myopia progression in children and adolescents.MethodsA literature search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database via Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). We will search for systematic reviews or meta-analyses that examine optical or pharmaceutical modalities for myopia control. Two independent overview authors will screen the titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria. Individual study's methodological quality and quality of evidence for each outcome of interest will be assessed by two independent authors using the ROBIS tool and GRADE rating, respectively. In cases of disagreement, consensus will be reached with the help of a third author. Our primary outcomes will be the mean change in refractive error, mean axial length change, and adverse events. A citation matrix will be generated, and the corrected covered area (CCA) will be estimated, in order to identify overlapping primary studies. Possible meta-biases and measures of heterogeneity will be described, and cases of dual co-authorship will be identified and discussed. If any recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are detected, these will be appraised and their findings will be presented. An overall summary of outcomes will be provided using descriptive statistics and will be supplemented by narrative synthesis.DiscussionThis overview will examine the high level of existing evidence for treatment of myopia progression. Efficient interventions will be identified, and side effects will be reported. The expected benefit is that all robust recent research evidence will be compiled in a single study. The results may inform future research in this area, which should provide insight into the appropriate regimes for the administration of these modalities and contribute to future guideline development.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017068204.
| S-EPMC5594593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of various atropine concentrations in managing myopia among children in East, South, and Southeast Asia, and to determine the most effective concentration.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. The search was limited to articles published up to 1 June 2024, and included studies in Chinese or English. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted relevant data, and assessed the data quality using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 (RoB2) tool. A network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 14.2 software to compare the efficacy of different atropine concentrations in delaying myopia progression, measured by changes in refraction and axial length.ResultsThe analysis included 39 studies with 7,712 participants, examining 10 atropine concentrations ranging from 0.005% to 1%. Forest plots indicated that five concentrations (0.01%, 0.02%, 0.025%, 0.05%, and 1%) were more effective than a placebo in controlling myopia progression. The cumulative ordination plot indicated that 0.05% atropine most effectively delayed refraction change, which the mean change per year was 0.62D, while 1% was superior in slowing axial length progression, which the mean change per year was -0.43 mm. Considering both measures, 1% atropine showed the highest efficacy which the mean changes per year were 0.56D in spherical equivalent refraction and -0.43 mm in axial length, followed by 0.05% and 0.125% atropine.ConclusionWhile 1% atropine demonstrated the highest efficacy in myopia control among East, South and Southeast Asian children, its use is not recommended due to increased adverse effects and a rapid rebound in myopia after cessation. Considering both efficacy and safety, 0.05% atropine is suggested as the optimal concentration for myopia management in this population.
| S-EPMC11683068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis work aimed to comprehensively assess the risk factors affecting myopia in children to develop more effective prevention and treatment strategies. To this end, data from database were employed to assess the relationship between the incidence of myopia and its risk factors.MethodsWe searched eight databases online in June 2022. Cohort studies were included that measured the connection between risk factors and myopia. Eligibility was not restricted by language. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to measure the risk of bias and conducted GRADE evaluation to determine the certainty of evidence. Potential risk factors with positive or negative results were seen. Inplasy Registration: https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-4-0109/.ResultsEvidence that risk factors for myopia are mixed, comprising both positive (20) and null (17) findings. In 19 cohort studies on 3578 children, girls were more likely to develop myopia (RR: 1.28 [1.22-1.35]). Myopia can occur at any age, from early childhood to late adulthood. Children whose parents had myopia were more likely to develop myopia. Longer outdoor activities time (RR: 0.97 [0.95-0.98]) and less near-work time (RR: 1.05 [1.02-1.07]) appeared to be significantly decrease the incidence of myopia. Children with lower SE, longer AL, a lower magnitude of positive relative accommodation, worse presenting visual acuity, deeper anterior chamber, and thinner crystalline lens may be related to myopia onset. The burden of myopia in underprivileged countries is higher than in developed countries (RR: 5.28 [2.06-13.48]). The quality of evidence for the evaluated factors was moderate to low or very low.ConclusionsGenetic factors, environmental factors (such as excessive use of electronic products, and poor study habits) and lifestyle factors (such as lack of outdoor activities, poor nutrition, etc.) are the main risk factors for myopia in children. Myopia prevention strategies should be designed based on environmental factors, gender, parental myopia and eye indicators in order to explore a lifestyle that is more conducive to the eye health of children.
| S-EPMC10511087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMyopia is a common visual disorder with increasing prevalence. Halting progression of myopia is critical, as high myopia can be complicated by a number of vision-compromising conditions.MethodsLiterature search was conducted in the following databases: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating the efficacy and safety of multiple myopia interventions vs control conditions, were considered. Methodological quality and quality of evidence of eligible studies were assessed using the ROBIS tool and GRADE rating. The degree of overlapping of index publications in the eligible reviews was calculated with the corrected covered area (CCA).ResultsForty-four unique primary studies contained in 18 eligible reviews and involving 6400 children were included in the analysis. CCA was estimated as 6.2% and thus considered moderate. Results demonstrated the superior efficacy of atropine eyedrops; 1% atropine vs placebo (change in refraction: -0.78D, [- 1.30 to - 0.25] in 1 year), 0.025 to 0.05% atropine vs control (change in refraction: -0.51D, [- 0.60 to - 0.41] in 1 year), 0.01% atropine vs control (change in refraction: -0.50D, [- 0.76 to - 0.24] in 1 year). Atropine was followed by orthokeratology (axial elongation: - 0.19 mm, [- 0.21 to - 0.16] in 1 year) and novel multifocal soft contact lenses (change in refraction: -0.15D, [- 0.27 to - 0.03] in 1 year). As regards adverse events, 1% atropine induced blurred near vision (odds ratio [OR] 9.47, [1.17 to 76.78]) and hypersensitivity reactions (OR 8.91, [1.04 to 76.03]).ConclusionsExisting evidence has failed to convince doctors to uniformly embrace treatments for myopic progression control, possibly due to existence of some heterogeneity, reporting of side effects and lack of long-term follow-up. Research geared towards efficient interventions is still necessary.
| S-EPMC6506938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: To comprehensively assess rebound effects by comparing myopia progression during atropine treatment and after discontinuation. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted up to 20 September 2023, using the keywords "myopia," "rebound," and "discontinue." Language restrictions were not applied, and reference lists were scrutinized for relevant studies. Our study selection criteria focused on randomized control trials and interventional studies involving children with myopia, specifically those treated with atropine or combination therapies for a minimum of 6 months, followed by a cessation period of at least 1 month. The analysis centered on reporting annual rates of myopia progression, considering changes in spherical equivalent (SE) or axial length (AL). Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers, and heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. A random-effects model was applied, and effect sizes were determined through weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals Our primary outcome was the evaluation of rebound effects on spherical equivalent or axial length. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on cessation and treatment durations, dosage levels, age, and baseline SE to provide a nuanced understanding of the data. Results: The analysis included 13 studies involving 2060 children. Rebound effects on SE were significantly higher at 6 months (WMD, 0.926 D/y; 95%CI, 0.288-1.563 D/y; p = .004) compared to 12 months (WMD, 0.268 D/y; 95%CI, 0.077-0.460 D/y; p = .006) after discontinuation of atropine. AL showed similar trends, with higher rebound effects at 6 months (WMD, 0.328 mm/y; 95%CI, 0.165-0.492 mm/y; p < .001) compared to 12 months (WMD, 0.121 mm/y; 95%CI, 0.02-0.217 mm/y; p = .014). Sensitivity analyses confirmed consistent results. Shorter treatment durations, younger age, and higher baseline SE levels were associated with more pronounced rebound effects. Transitioning or stepwise cessation still caused rebound effects but combining optical therapy with atropine seemed to prevent the rebound effects. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis highlights the temporal and dose-dependent rebound effects after discontinuing atropine. Individuals with shorter treatment durations, younger age, and higher baseline SE tend to experience more significant rebound effects. Further research on the rebound effect is warranted. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=463093], identifier [registration number].
| S-EPMC10838978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UpdatesThis is the second version (first update) of the living systematic review, replacing the previous version (available as a data supplement). When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.ObjectiveTo determine and compare the effects of drug prophylaxis on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19).DesignLiving systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).Data sourcesWorld Health Organization covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature to 4 March 2022.Study selectionRandomised trials in which people at risk of covid-19 were allocated to prophylaxis or no prophylaxis (standard care or placebo). Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles.MethodsAfter duplicate data abstraction, we conducted random-effects bayesian network meta-analysis. We assessed risk of bias of the included studies using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach.ResultsThe second iteration of this living NMA includes 32 randomised trials which enrolled 25 147 participants and addressed 21 different prophylactic drugs; adding 21 trials (66%), 18 162 participants (75%) and 16 (76%) prophylactic drugs. Of the 16 prophylactic drugs analysed, none provided convincing evidence of a reduction in the risk of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For admission to hospital and mortality outcomes, no prophylactic drug proved different than standard care or placebo. Hydroxychloroquine and vitamin C combined with zinc probably increase the risk of adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation—risk difference for hydroxychloroquine (RD) 6 more per 1000 (95% credible interval (CrI) 2 more to 10 more); for vitamin C combined with zinc, RD 69 more per 1000 (47 more to 90 more), moderate certainty evidence.ConclusionsMuch of the evidence remains very low certainty and we therefore anticipate future studies evaluating drugs for prophylaxis may change the results for SARS-CoV-2 infection, admission to hospital and mortality outcomes. Both hydroxychloroquine and vitamin C combined with zinc probably increase adverse effects.Systematic review registrationThis review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a supplement.FundingThis study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant CIHR-IRSC:0579001321).
| S-EPMC8073806 | biostudies-literature