Amblyopia Treatment - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Amblyopia Treatment

The Experts below are selected from a list of 1458 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Jonathan M Holmes – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Designing clinical trials for Amblyopia
    Vision Research, 2015
    Co-Authors: Jonathan M Holmes

    Abstract:

    Randomized clinical trial (RCT) study design leads to one of the highest levels of evidence, and is a preferred study design over cohort studies, because randomization reduces bias and maximizes the chance that even unknown confounding factors will be balanced between Treatment groups. Recent randomized clinical trials and observational studies in Amblyopia can be taken together to formulate an evidence-based approach to Amblyopia Treatment, which is presented in this review. When designing future clinical studies of Amblyopia Treatment, issues such as regression to the mean, sample size and trial duration must be considered, since each may impact study results and conclusions.

  • effect of age on response to Amblyopia Treatment in children
    Archives of Ophthalmology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Jonathan M Holmes, Elizabeth L. Lazar, William F Astle, Linda R Dagi, Sean P. Donahue, Richard W Hertle, Michael X Repka, Michele B Melia, Marcela Frazier, Graham E. Quinn

    Abstract:

    Objective To determine whether age at initiation of Treatment for Amblyopia influences the response among children 3 to less than 13 years of age with unilateral Amblyopia who have 20/40 to 20/400 amblyopic eye visual acuity. Methods A meta-analysis of individual subject data from 4 recently completed randomized Amblyopia Treatment trials was performed to evaluate the relationship between age and improvement in logMAR amblyopic eye visual acuity. Analyses were adjusted for baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity, spherical equivalent refractive error in the amblyopic eye, type of Amblyopia, prior Amblyopia Treatment, study Treatment, and protocol. Age was categorized (3 to Results Children from 7 to less than 13 years of age were significantly less responsive to Treatment than were younger age groups (children from 3 to Conclusions Amblyopia is more responsive to Treatment among children younger than 7 years of age. Although the average Treatment response is smaller in children 7 to less than 13 years of age, some children show a marked response to Treatment.

  • Effect of age on response to Amblyopia Treatment in children
    Archives of Ophthalmology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Jonathan M Holmes, Elizabeth L. Lazar, B.michelle Melia, William F Astle, Linda R Dagi, Sean P. Donahue, Marcela G. Frazier, Richard W Hertle, Michael X Repka, Graham E. Quinn

    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE To determine whether age at initiation of Treatment for Amblyopia influences the response among children 3 to less than 13 years of age with unilateral Amblyopia who have 20/40 to 20/400 amblyopic eye visual acuity. METHODS A meta-analysis of individual subject data from 4 recently completed randomized Amblyopia Treatment trials was performed to evaluate the relationship between age and improvement in logMAR amblyopic eye visual acuity. Analyses were adjusted for baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity, spherical equivalent refractive error in the amblyopic eye, type of Amblyopia, prior Amblyopia Treatment, study Treatment, and protocol. Age was categorized (3 to

Richard W Hertle – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • effect of age on response to Amblyopia Treatment in children
    Archives of Ophthalmology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Jonathan M Holmes, Elizabeth L. Lazar, William F Astle, Linda R Dagi, Sean P. Donahue, Richard W Hertle, Michael X Repka, Michele B Melia, Marcela Frazier, Graham E. Quinn

    Abstract:

    Objective To determine whether age at initiation of Treatment for Amblyopia influences the response among children 3 to less than 13 years of age with unilateral Amblyopia who have 20/40 to 20/400 amblyopic eye visual acuity. Methods A meta-analysis of individual subject data from 4 recently completed randomized Amblyopia Treatment trials was performed to evaluate the relationship between age and improvement in logMAR amblyopic eye visual acuity. Analyses were adjusted for baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity, spherical equivalent refractive error in the amblyopic eye, type of Amblyopia, prior Amblyopia Treatment, study Treatment, and protocol. Age was categorized (3 to Results Children from 7 to less than 13 years of age were significantly less responsive to Treatment than were younger age groups (children from 3 to Conclusions Amblyopia is more responsive to Treatment among children younger than 7 years of age. Although the average Treatment response is smaller in children 7 to less than 13 years of age, some children show a marked response to Treatment.

  • Effect of age on response to Amblyopia Treatment in children
    Archives of Ophthalmology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Jonathan M Holmes, Elizabeth L. Lazar, B.michelle Melia, William F Astle, Linda R Dagi, Sean P. Donahue, Marcela G. Frazier, Richard W Hertle, Michael X Repka, Graham E. Quinn

    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE To determine whether age at initiation of Treatment for Amblyopia influences the response among children 3 to less than 13 years of age with unilateral Amblyopia who have 20/40 to 20/400 amblyopic eye visual acuity. METHODS A meta-analysis of individual subject data from 4 recently completed randomized Amblyopia Treatment trials was performed to evaluate the relationship between age and improvement in logMAR amblyopic eye visual acuity. Analyses were adjusted for baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity, spherical equivalent refractive error in the amblyopic eye, type of Amblyopia, prior Amblyopia Treatment, study Treatment, and protocol. Age was categorized (3 to

  • stability of visual acuity improvement following discontinuation of Amblyopia Treatment in children aged 7 to 12 years
    Archives of Ophthalmology, 2007
    Co-Authors: Richard W Hertle, Jonathan M Holmes, Michael X Repka, Roy W Beck, Darron A. Bacal, Eileen E Birch, Danielle L. Chandler, Mitchell Scheiman, Deborah L Klimek, David R Weakley

    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE: To assess the stability of visual acuity improvement during the first year after cessation of Amblyopia Treatment other than spectacle wear in children aged 7 to 12 years. METHODS: At the completion of a multicenter randomized trial during which Amblyopia treated with patching and atropine improved by at least 2 lines on the electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study testing protocol, 80 patients aged 7 to 12 years were followed up while not receiving Treatment (other than spectacle wear) for 1 year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ten letters or more (> or =2 lines) worsening of visual acuity (measured using the electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study testing protocol) during the year following Treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: During the year following cessation of Treatment, the cumulative probability of worsening visual acuity (> or =2 lines) was 7% (95% confidence interval, 3%-17%); 82% of patients maintained an increase in visual acuity of 10 letters or more compared with their visual acuity before starting Treatment. CONCLUSION: Visual acuity improvement occurring during Amblyopia Treatment is sustained in most children aged 7 to 12 years for at least 1 year after discontinuing Treatment other than spectacle wear. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00094692.

Eileen E Birch – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Baseline and Clinical Factors Associated with Response to Amblyopia Treatment in a Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Optometry and Vision Science, 2020
    Co-Authors: Eileen E Birch, Reed M. Jost, Krista R. Kelly, Joel N. Leffler, Cynthia L. Beauchamp

    Abstract:

    SIGNIFICANCE We sought to identify baseline and clinical factors that were predictive of the response to Amblyopia Treatment. We report that binocular Amblyopia Treatment may be especially effective for moderate Amblyopia in orthotropic children. PURPOSE We previously reported results from the primary cohort (n = 28) enrolled in a randomized clinical trial (NCT02365090), which found that binocular Amblyopia Treatment was more effective than patching. Enrollment of an additional 20 children was pre-planned to provide the opportunity to examine factors that may be predictive of response to Amblyopia Treatment. METHODS Forty-eight children (4 to 10 years old) were enrolled, with 24 randomized to contrast-rebalanced binocular game Treatment (1 hour a day, 5 days a week) and 24 to patching Treatment (2 hours a day, 7 days a week). The primary outcome was change in amblyopic eye best-corrected visual acuity at the 2-week visit. Baseline factors examined were age at enrollment, visual acuity, stereoacuity, and suppression. Clinical factors were etiology, age at diagnosis, prior Treatment, and ocular alignment. RESULTS At 2 weeks, visual acuity improvement was significantly greater with the binocular game than patching. Children with moderate Amblyopia and orthotropia had more visual acuity improvement with binocular game play than did those with severe Amblyopia. In addition, children who spent more time playing the binocular game had more improvement. We were not able to confidently identify any baseline or clinical factors that were associated with response to patching Treatment. CONCLUSIONS Binocular Amblyopia Treatment was more effective among orthotropic children with moderate Amblyopia than among children with microtropia or severe Amblyopia.

  • Binocular Amblyopia Treatment with contrast-rebalanced movies
    Journal of Aapos, 2019
    Co-Authors: Eileen E Birch, Cynthia L. Beauchamp, Reed M. Jost, Krista R. Kelly, Angie De La Cruz, David R. Stager, Joel N. Leffler

    Abstract:

    Background Binocular Amblyopia Treatments promote visual acuity recovery and binocularity by rebalancing the signal strength of dichoptic images. Most require active participation by the amblyopic child to play a game or perform a repetitive visual task. The purpose of this study was to investigate a passive form of binocular Treatment with contrast-rebalanced dichoptic movies. Methods A total of 27 amblyopic children, 4-10 years of age, wore polarized glasses to watch 6 contrast-rebalanced dichoptic movies on a passive 3D display during a 2-week period. Amblyopic eye contrast was 100%; fellow eye contrast was initially set to a lower level (20%-60%), which allowed the child to overcome suppression and use binocular vision. Fellow eye contrast was incremented by 10% for each subsequent movie. Best-corrected visual acuity, random dot stereoacuity, and interocular suppression were measured at baseline and at 2 weeks. Results Amblyopic eye best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.57 ± 0.22 at baseline to 0.42 ± 0.23 logMAR (t26 = 8.09; P  Conclusions In this cohort, passive viewing of contrast-rebalanced dichoptic movies effectively improved visual acuity in amblyopic subjects. The degree of improvement observed was similar to that previously reported for 2 weeks of binocular games Treatment and with 3-4 months of occlusion therapy.

  • comparison of the Amblyopia Treatment study hotv and the electronic early Treatment of diabetic retinopathy study visual acuity protocols in amblyopic children aged 5 to 11 years
    Journal of Aapos, 2009
    Co-Authors: Eileen E Birch, Roy W Beck, Samara F Strauber, Jonathan M Holmes

    Abstract:

    As part of the long-term follow-up of amblyopic children who were enrolled in the Amblyopia Treatment Study, we tested visual acuity in both eyes of 142 patients by using 2 established visual acuity protocols, the Amblyopia Treatment Study HOTV (ATS HOTV) visual acuity protocol and the Electronic-Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS) protocol, at one of the annual visits. Mean age at the time of testing was 9.0 years (range, 5.6-11.9 years). The ATS-HOTV protocol resulted in a slight mean overestimate of visual acuity relative to the E-ETDRS protocol (0.68 lines for amblyopic eyes; 0.25 lines for fellow eyes). The overestimation occurred primarily when the E-ETDRS visual acuity was poorer than 0.3 logMAR. ATS-HOTV acuity also underestimated interocular visual acuity differences by 0.42 lines. When one uses the ATS-HOTV protocol, it may be wise to exercise caution when interpreting “near-normal” visual acuity or interocular differences as “within normal” because the ATS-HOTV method may have a slight bias toward better performance of amblyopic eyes than E-ETDRS.