VISUAL ACUITY ASSESSMENT WITH ATROPINE PENALIZATION VS PARTIAL OCCLUSION THERAPY IN AMBLYOPIA PATIENTS IN SOUTH PUNJAB

M MUZAMIL; B MAJEED; . ATTAULLAH; MRQ RAO; F TAYYAB; H BATOOL

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v2023i1.637

Authors

M MUZAMIL Department of Ophthalmology, Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan
B MAJEED Department of Ophthalmology, Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan
. ATTAULLAH Department of Ophthalmology, Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan
MRQ RAO Department of Ophthalmology (Head of Dept.), Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan
F TAYYAB Department of Ophthalmology, Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan
H BATOOL Department of Ophthalmology, Nishter Medical University and Hospital (NMU & H) Multan, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2023i1.637

Keywords:

Penalization, Atropine, Occlusion, Amblyopia

Abstract

A retrospective study was conducted in the Ophthalmology Department of Nishtar Medical Hospital from September 2022 to September 2023 to compare the effectiveness of atropine penalization and occlusion therapy in treating amblyopia in children. The study included 50 children aged 2-9 years with no prior treatment history of amblyopia. The children were divided into two groups: Group A received atropine penalization, while Group B received occlusion therapy. Both groups had a mean age of 5.5 years, and all patients passed the visual acuity tests. Strabismus was high in both groups, with 96% in Group A and 92% in Group B. The treatment duration in Group A was 7.5 months on average, while it was 4.5 months in Group B. Treatment compliance was higher in Group A (96%) compared to Group B (68%). After the treatment, the atropine group had a visual acuity range of 6/6 to 6/60, with a mean visual acuity of 6/10. On the other hand, the occlusion group had a visual acuity range of 6/6 to 6/120, with a mean visual acuity of 6/20. The study concluded that atropine penalization had better patient outcomes and compliance in treating amblyopia in pediatric patients. The study concluded that atropine penalization had better patient outcomes and compliance in treating amblyopia in pediatric patients.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bhola, R., Keech, R. V., Kutschke, P., Pfeifer, W., and Scott, W. E. (2006). Recurrence of amblyopia after occlusion therapy. Ophthalmology 113, 2097-2100.

Elhusseiny, A. M., Wu, C., MacKinnon, S., and Hunter, D. G. (2020). Severe reverse amblyopia with atropine penalization. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 24, 106-108.

Findlay, R., Black, J., and Anstice, N. (2019). Diagnosis and Management of Residual Amblyopia in a Non-compliant Patient: a Teaching Case Report. Optometric Education 44, 1-12.

Le, T., and Örge, F. (2022). Treatment compliance in amblyopia: A mini-review and description of a novel online platform for compliance tracking. Survey of Ophthalmology.

Li, T., Qureshi, R., and Taylor, K. (2019). Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Li, Y., Sun, H., Zhu, X., Su, Y., Yu, T., Wu, X., Zhou, X., and Jing, L. (2020). Efficacy of interventions for amblyopia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMC Ophthalmology 20, 1-9.

Osborne, D. C., Greenhalgh, K. M., Evans, M. J., and Self, J. E. (2018). Atropine penalization versus occlusion therapies for unilateral amblyopia after the critical period of visual development: a systematic review. Ophthalmology and Therapy 7, 323-332.

Papageorgiou, E., Asproudis, I., Maconachie, G., Tsironi, E. E., and Gottlob, I. (2019). The treatment of amblyopia: current practice and emerging trends. Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 257, 1061-1078.

Sen, S., Singh, P., and Saxena, R. (2022). Management of amblyopia in pediatric patients: Current insights. Eye 36, 44-56.

Shetty, N. K., and Prathyusha, I. (2019). Factors influencing occlusion therapy in refractive amblyopia. The Journal of Medical Research 5, 15-21.

Shoshany, T. N., Michalak, S., Staffa, S. J., Chinn, R. N., Bishop, K., and Hunter, D. G. (2020). Effect of primary occlusion therapy in asymmetric, bilateral amblyopia. American Journal of Ophthalmology 211, 87-93.

Steel, D. A., Codina, C. J., and Arblaster, G. E. (2019). Amblyopia treatment and quality of life: the child’s perspective on atropine versus patching. Strabismus 27, 156-164.

Sultan, P., Demir, U., Sonmezay, S. E., and Gungel, H. (2022). Factors Influencing the Success of Atropine Penalization Treatment in Amblyopia Patients Non-Responsive to Occlusion Treatment. Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility 72, 212-218.

Vagge, A., Ferro Desideri, L., and Traverso, C. E. (2020). An update on pharmacological treatment options for amblyopia. International Ophthalmology 40, 3591-3597.

Varma, H., Vallabh, N., and Motley, W. W. (2021). Change in refractive error with atropine penalization in anisohypermetropic amblyopia. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus {JAAPOS} 25, e30.

Wang, S., Wen, W., Zhu, W., Liu, Y., Zou, L., Tian, T., Lin, J., Liu, R., and Liu, H. (2021). Effect of combined atropine and patching vs patching alone for treatment of severe amblyopia in children aged 3 to 12 years: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA ophthalmology 139, 990-996.

Wang, X.-Y. (2022). Therapeutic effects of Atropine penalization therapy and occlusion therapy on children with anisometropic amblyopia. International Eye Science, 642-646.

White, E., and Walsh, L. (2022). The impact of occlusion therapy on amblyopia success outcomes. Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility 72, 183-190.