Cargando…

The Need for a Unified Protocol for Termination of Amblyopia Treatment

INTRODUCTION: Many authors have investigated the methodology and outcomes of amblyopia treatment. However, the evidence on termination of treatment, specifically referring to the stability of visual outcome and timing of reviewing patients after treatment ends, has received less interest with no agr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nassar, Mahmoud M., Mitchell, Fiona Campbell
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: White Rose University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7510402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999960
http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.109
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Many authors have investigated the methodology and outcomes of amblyopia treatment. However, the evidence on termination of treatment, specifically referring to the stability of visual outcome and timing of reviewing patients after treatment ends, has received less interest with no agreement on risk factors of visual regression. PURPOSE: To study the final part of amblyopia service with particular emphasis to stability of visual outcome; efficacy and timing of follow up after treatment ends. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients discharged following treatment for strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia. Exclusion criteria were ocular pathology, poor attendance or poor compliance. Collected data included: age at the start of treatment, type and duration of treatment, number of visits, visual acuity (at start and end). Additionally, we analysed the duration and number of visits after stopping treatment, final visual acuity at discharge and duration of treatment with minimal change in vision. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were identified with a mean age 4.2 ± 1.7SD years. Patients had an average of 116.6 ± 13.9SD visits over 30.5 ± 21.5SD months. Of these, 71.8% had occlusion only and 28.2% in combination with atropine. All but three patients had improved vision, with mean letters gained 13.2 ± 8.7SD LogMAR. The improvement in vision was statistically significant p < 0.005 and patients were further followed without treatment for 10 ± 13.5SD months over 5.2 ± 6.6SD visits. The mean final vision at discharge was not significantly different from vision at termination (p = 0.68) and we found no significant recurrence. CONCLUSION: Amblyopia treatment is effective; however, there is inconsistency in many aspects of ending treatment. Further improvement is needed to standardise care from termination of treatment up to discharge from service.