-
Eye (London, England) Nov 2023To analyse and compare the efficacy of different interventions for myopia prevention and control in children. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To analyse and compare the efficacy of different interventions for myopia prevention and control in children.
METHODS
We 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).
RESULTS
A 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.
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis suggests that the combined measures were most effective in AL and R, followed by Atropine.
Topics: Child; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Disease Progression; Myopia; Atropine; Contact Lenses, Hydrophilic; Refraction, Ocular; Axial Length, Eye
PubMed: 37106147
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-023-02534-8 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Jul 2016The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to investigate the link (if any) between vision and dizziness. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to investigate the link (if any) between vision and dizziness.
METHODS
Medline, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library were searched with keywords chosen to find articles which investigated the causes of dizziness and considered vision as a possible trigger. Citation chaining of all included papers was performed in addition to the hand searching of all reference lists. Unpublished literature was identified using www.opengrey.eu. The review considered studies involving adults which link, measure or attempt to improve any aspect of vision in relation to dizziness.
RESULTS
Nine thousand six hundred and eighty one possible references were found, and the abstracts were screened independently by two reviewers to determine if they should be included in the study. Thirteen papers were found which investigated whether dizziness was linked to an assessment of vision. Visual impairment measures were crude and typically self-report, or Snellen visual acuity with little or no measurement details. Five studies found an independent link between dizziness and vision, five found a weak association (typically finding a link when univariate analyses were used, but not when multivariate analyses were used), and three found no association. Studies finding a strong link were usually cross-sectional with a large study population whereas those finding a weak association had relatively small numbers of participants. Studies which did not find an association used a broad definition of dizziness that included the term light-headedness, an unreliable Rosenbaum near visual acuity chart or an unusual categorisation of visual acuity.
CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that dizziness (although likely not 'light-headedness') is linked with poor vision although further studies using more appropriate measures of vision are recommended.
Topics: Dizziness; Humans; Vision, Low; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 27255594
DOI: 10.1111/opo.12299 -
American Journal of Ophthalmology Jun 2017To compare the postoperative efficacy, predictability, safety, and visual quality of all major forms of laser corneal refractive surgeries for correcting myopia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To compare the postoperative efficacy, predictability, safety, and visual quality of all major forms of laser corneal refractive surgeries for correcting myopia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the US trial registry was conducted up to November 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) reporting in accordance with the eligibility criteria were included in this review. We performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Forty-eight RCTs were identified. For efficacy (uncorrected visual acuity [UCVA]), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) ranking (from best to worst) was femtosecond-based laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), LASIK, small-incision lenticule extraction, femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK), epipolis (Epi)-LASIK, transepithelial PRK (T-PRK). For predictability (refractive spherical equivalent [SE]), a statistically significant difference was found when FS-LASIK was compared with LASIK (odds ratio [OR] 2.29, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.20-4.14), PRK (OR 2.16, 95% CrI 1.15-4.03), LASEK (OR 2.09, 95% CrI 1.08-4.55), and Epi-LASIK (OR 2.74, 95% CrI 1.11-6.20). The SUCRA ranking (from best to worst) was FS-LASIK, T-PRK, LASEK, PRK, LASIK, Epi-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the safety (best spectacle-corrected visual acuity) comparisons. For both postoperative higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and contrast sensitivity (CS), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA ranking results show that some corneal surface ablation techniques (PRK and LASEK) rank highest.
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis shows that there were no statistically significant differences in either visual outcomes (efficacy and safety) or visual quality (HOAs and CS). FS-LASIK behaved better in predictability than any other type of surgeries.
Topics: Cornea; Humans; Lasers, Excimer; Myopia; Network Meta-Analysis; Photorefractive Keratectomy; Postoperative Period; Refraction, Ocular; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 28336402
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.03.013 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Mar 2020Digital screen time has been cited as a potential modifiable environmental risk factor that can increase myopia risk. However, associations between screen time and...
PURPOSE
Digital screen time has been cited as a potential modifiable environmental risk factor that can increase myopia risk. However, associations between screen time and myopia have not been consistently reported. Although myopia prevalence increased before the massive use of digital devices in some countries, with the rise being influenced by education, there may be an added recent effect of screen time. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the association between screen time and the risk of developing (1) prevalent or incident myopia, or (2) the risk of myopia progression in children. Published manuscripts were identified in PubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library, and citation lists were reviewed.
RECENT FINDINGS
Fifteen studies were included (nine cross-sectional and six cohort studies) with a total of 49 789 children aged between 3 and 19 years old. Seven studies found an association between screen time and myopia. The results showed mixed evidence with the more recent studies exposing a trend of association between hours spent by children using screens and myopia. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed in five studies (n = 20 889) that reported odds ratio (OR). The I statistics was used to assess heterogeneity. A pooled OR of 1.02 (95% CI: 0.96-1.08; p = 0.48) suggests that screen time is not associated with prevalent and incident myopia in this group of five studies.
SUMMARY
The results for screen time and myopia are mixed. Further studies with objective screen time measurements are necessary to assess evidence of an association between screen time and myopia.
Topics: Global Health; Humans; Myopia; Prevalence; Refraction, Ocular; Risk Factors; Screen Time; Time Factors
PubMed: 31943280
DOI: 10.1111/opo.12657 -
BMJ Open Aug 2023To systematically investigate the associations between vision impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash (MVC) involvement, and evaluate vision-related interventions to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically investigate the associations between vision impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash (MVC) involvement, and evaluate vision-related interventions to reduce MVCs.
DESIGN
Medline (Ovid), EMBASE and Global Health electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2022 for observational and interventional English-language studies. Screening, data extraction and appraisals using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools were completed by two reviewers independently. Where appropriate, measures of association were converted into risk ratios (RRs) or ORs for meta-analysis.
PARTICIPANTS
Drivers of four-wheeled vehicles of all ages with no cognitive declines.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES
MVC involvement (primary) and driving cessation (secondary).
RESULTS
101 studies (n=778 052) were included after full-text review. 57 studies only involved older drivers (≥65 years) and 85 were in high-income settings. Heterogeneity in the data meant that most meta-analyses were underpowered as only 25 studies, further split into different groups of eye diseases and measures of vision, could be meta-analysed. The limited evidence from the meta-analyses suggests that visual field defects (four studies; RR 1.51 (95% CI 1.23, 1.85); p<0.001; I=46.79%), and contrast sensitivity (two studies; RR 1.40 (95% CI 1.08, 1.80); p=0.01, I=0.11%) and visual acuity loss (five studies; RR 1.21 (95% CI 1.02, 1.43); p=0.03, I=28.49%) may increase crash risk. The results are more inconclusive for available evidence for associations of glaucoma (five studies, RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.67, 2.42); p=0.47; I=93.48%) and cataract (two studies RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.97, 1.36); p=0.11; I=3.96%) with crashes. Driving cessation may also be linked with glaucoma (two studies; RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.20, 2.19); p<0.001, I=22.45%), age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (three studies; RR 2.21 (95% CI 1.47, 3.31); p<0.001, I=75.11%) and reduced contrast sensitivity (three studies; RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.05, 1.61); p=0.02; I=63.19%). Cataract surgery halved MVC risk (three studies; RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.34, 0.92); p=0.02; I=97.10). Ranibizumab injections (four randomised controlled trials) prolonged driving in persons with AMD.
CONCLUSION
Impaired vision identified through a variety of measures is associated with both increased MVC involvement and cessation. Cataract surgery can reduce MVC risk. Despite literature being highly heterogeneous, this review shows that detection of vision problems and appropriate treatment are critical to road safety.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020172153.
Topics: Humans; Visual Acuity; Ranibizumab; Accidents, Traffic; Macular Degeneration; Vision Disorders; Cataract
PubMed: 37567751
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065210 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2011Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual development (<7-8 years of age). The cumulative incidence is estimated at 2% to 4% in children aged up to 15 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to detect amblyopia early? What are the effects of medical treatments for amblyopia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 33 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: active vision therapy; glasses alone or with occlusion; or penalisation to treat amblyopia; and screening to detect amblyopia early.
Topics: Amblyopia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Refractive Errors; Sensory Deprivation; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21714945
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Sep 2009Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual development (<7-8 years of age). The cumulative incidence is estimated at 2% to 4% in children aged up to 15 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to detect amblyopia early? What are the effects of medical treatments for amblyopia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 16 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: active vision therapy; glasses alone or with occlusion; or penalisation to treat amblyopia; and screening to detect amblyopia early.
Topics: Amblyopia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Mydriatics; Sensory Deprivation; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21726480
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Cataract and Refractive... Jan 2010To quantify the benefits of expedited cataract surgery in improving visual acuity and reducing fall-related injuries in the older population. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To quantify the benefits of expedited cataract surgery in improving visual acuity and reducing fall-related injuries in the older population.
SETTING
Developmental Neurosciences and Child Health: Neurons to Neighbourhoods, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted. Studies were included if expedited cataract surgery was presented as a measure to enhance vision and to reduce injury. Published and unpublished studies with any type of study design were included. Studies were identified from 12 databases including Medline (1950 to 2008) and Embase (1980 to 2008). The metaanalysis was specific to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
RESULTS
The review comprised 737 participants. Sufficient data for the metaanalysis were available to evaluate the impact of expedited cataract surgery on improved visual acuity and a reduced fall rate. Twenty-two publications that included RCTs and prospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies evaluated visual acuity after expedited routine cataract surgery and routine cataract surgery. The pooled estimate showed that expedited cataract surgery increased visual acuity by more than 7 times (odds ratio [OR], 7.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.16-16.55; P<.0001). Pooling of data from 2 RCTs of 535 participants showed a nonsignificant reduction in the incidence of falls after expedited cataract surgery (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.55-1.17).
CONCLUSIONS
Accumulating evidence indicates that expedited cataract surgery is effective in significantly enhancing vision but is inconclusive in preventing falls.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged; Ambulatory Care; Cataract; Cataract Extraction; Female; Health Services for the Aged; Humans; Male; Visual Acuity; Visually Impaired Persons; Waiting Lists
PubMed: 20117700
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.07.032 -
International Journal of Ophthalmology 2023Adequate near and intermediate visual capacity is important in performing everyday tasks, especially after the introduction of smartphones and computers in our... (Review)
Review
Adequate near and intermediate visual capacity is important in performing everyday tasks, especially after the introduction of smartphones and computers in our professional and recreational activities. Primary objective of this study was to review all available reading tests both conventional and digital and explore their integrated characteristics. A systematic review of the recent literature regarding reading charts was performed based on the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Springer databases between February and March 2021. Data from 11 descriptive and 24 comparative studies were included in the present systematic review. Clinical settings are still dominated by conventional printed reading charts; however, the most prevalent of them (, Jaeger type charts) are not validated. Reliable reading capacity assessment is done only by those that comply with the International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO) recommendations. Digital reading tests are gaining popularity both in clinical and research settings and are differentiated in standard computer-based applications that require installation either in a computer or a tablet (, Advanced VISION Test and web-based ones , Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test requires no installation). It is evident that validated digital tests will prevail in future clinical or research settings and it is upon ophthalmologists to select the one most compatible with their examination routine.
PubMed: 36659955
DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2023.01.18 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence May 2011Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetes control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetes control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being most at risk. Diabetic retinopathy can cause microaneurysms, haemorrhages, exudates, changes to blood vessels, and retinal thickening.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with diabetic retinopathy? What are the effects of treatments for vitreous haemorrhage? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 58 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: peripheral retinal laser photocoagulation, focal and grid laser photocoagulation for maculopathy, corticosteroids for macular oedema, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, and vitrectomy for vitreous haemorrhage.
Topics: Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Injections; Macular Edema; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21609511
DOI: No ID Found