-
Frontiers in Public Health 2023Myopia has significantly risen in East and Southeast Asia, and the pathological outcomes of this condition, such as myopic maculopathy and optic neuropathy linked to... (Review)
Review
Myopia has significantly risen in East and Southeast Asia, and the pathological outcomes of this condition, such as myopic maculopathy and optic neuropathy linked to high myopia, have emerged as leading causes of irreversible vision loss. Addressing this issue requires strategies to reduce myopia prevalence and prevent progression to high myopia. Encouraging outdoor activities for schoolchildren and reducing near-work and screen time can effectively prevent myopia development, offering a safe intervention that promotes healthier habits. Several clinical approaches can be employed to decelerate myopia progression, such as administering low-dose atropine eye drops (0.05%), utilizing orthokeratology lenses, implementing soft contact lenses equipped with myopia control features, and incorporating spectacle lenses with aspherical lenslets. When choosing an appropriate strategy, factors such as age, ethnicity, and the rate of myopia progression should be considered. However, some treatments may encounter obstacles such as adverse side effects, high costs, complex procedures, or limited effectiveness. Presently, low-dose atropine (0.05%), soft contact lenses with myopia control features, and orthokeratology lenses appear as promising options for managing myopia. The measures mentioned above are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and researchers are increasingly exploring their combined effects. By advocating for a personalized approach based on individual risk factors and the unique needs of each child, this review aims to contribute to the development of targeted and effective myopia prevention strategies, thereby minimizing the impact of myopia and its related complications among school-aged children in affected regions.
Topics: Humans; Child; Atropine; Ethnicity; Myopia; Research Personnel
PubMed: 37655278
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1226438 -
JAMA Internal Medicine Jul 2023Clinical guidelines on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend inhalers containing long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β-agonists...
IMPORTANCE
Clinical guidelines on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend inhalers containing long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) over inhalers containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and LABAs. However, data from randomized clinical trials comparing these combination inhalers (LAMA-LABAs vs ICS-LABAs) have been conflicting and raised concerns of generalizability.
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether LAMA-LABA therapy is associated with reduced COPD exacerbations and pneumonia hospitalizations compared with ICS-LABA therapy in routine clinical practice.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This was a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study using Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart, a large commercial insurance-claims database. Patients must have had a diagnosis of COPD and filled a new prescription for a combination LAMA-LABA or ICS-LABA inhaler between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Patients younger than 40 years were excluded, as were those with a prior diagnosis of asthma. The current analysis was performed from February 2021 to March 2023.
EXPOSURES
Combination LAMA-LABA inhalers (aclidinium-formoterol, glycopyrronium-formoterol, glycopyrronium-indacaterol, tiotropium-olodaterol, or umeclidinium-vilanterol) and combination ICS-LABA inhalers (budesonide-formoterol, fluticasone-salmeterol, fluticasone-vilanterol, or mometasone-formoterol).
MAIN OUTCOME
The primary effectiveness outcome was first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation, and the primary safety outcome was first pneumonia hospitalization. Propensity score matching was used to control for confounding between the 2 groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate propensity scores. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models stratified on matched pairs.
RESULTS
Among 137 833 patients (mean [SD] age, 70.2 [9.9] years; 69 530 [50.4%] female) (107 004 new ICS-LABA users and 30 829 new LAMA-LABA users), 30 216 matched pairs were identified for the primary analysis. Compared with ICS-LABA use, LAMA-LABA use was associated with an 8% reduction in the rate of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96) and a 20% reduction in the rate of first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.86). These findings were robust across a range of prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION
In this cohort study, LAMA-LABA therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with ICS-LABA therapy, suggesting that LAMA-LABA therapy should be preferred for patients with COPD.
Topics: Humans; Female; Aged; Male; Glycopyrrolate; Cohort Studies; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Administration, Inhalation; Fluticasone; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Muscarinic Antagonists; Formoterol Fumarate; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Pneumonia; Bronchodilator Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination
PubMed: 37213116
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.1245 -
JAMA Network Open Nov 2023Several interventions exist for treating myopia progression in children. While these interventions' efficacy has been studied, their cost-effectiveness remains unknown...
IMPORTANCE
Several interventions exist for treating myopia progression in children. While these interventions' efficacy has been studied, their cost-effectiveness remains unknown and has not been compared.
OBJECTIVE
To determine cost-effective options for controlling myopia progression in children.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
In this cost-effectiveness analysis, a Markov model was designed to compare the cost-effectiveness of interventions for controlling myopia progression over 5 years from a societal perspective in a simulated hypothetical cohort of patients aged 10 years with myopia. Myopia interventions considered included atropine eye drops, 0.05% and 0.01%, defocus incorporated multiple segment spectacles, outdoor activity, soft contact lenses (daily disposable and multifocal), rigid gas-permeable contact lenses, progressive addition lenses, bifocal spectacle lenses, orthokeratology, highly aspherical lenslets (HALs), and red light therapy; all interventions were compared with single-vision lenses. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined the association of model uncertainties with the cost-effectiveness. Costs were obtained from the charges of the Hospital Authority of Hong Kong and The Chinese University of Hong Kong Eye Center.
MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES
The mean costs (in US dollars) per child included the cost of hospital visits, medications, and optical lenses. The outcomes of effectiveness were the annual spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and axial length (AL) reductions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each strategy relative to single-vision lenses over a time horizon of 5 years.
RESULTS
Outdoor activity, atropine (0.05%), red light therapy, HALs, and orthokeratology were cost-effective. The ICER of atropine, 0.05%, was US $220/SER reduction; red light therapy, US $846/SER reduction; and HALs, US $448/SER reduction. Outdoor activity yielded a savings of US $5/SER reduction and US $8/AL reduction. Orthokeratology resulted in an ICER of US $2376/AL reduction.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that atropine eye drops, 0.05%, and outdoor activity are cost-effective for controlling myopia progression in children. Though more expensive, red light therapy, HALs, and orthokeratology may also be cost-effective. The use of these interventions may help to control myopia in a cost-effective way.
Topics: Humans; Child; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular; Atropine; Ophthalmic Solutions
PubMed: 37917061
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.40986