-
JAMA Feb 2023Early onset of myopia is associated with high myopia later in life, and myopia is irreversible once developed. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Early onset of myopia is associated with high myopia later in life, and myopia is irreversible once developed.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of low-concentration atropine eyedrops at 0.05% and 0.01% concentration for delaying the onset of myopia.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked trial conducted at the Chinese University of Hong Kong Eye Centre enrolled 474 nonmyopic children aged 4 through 9 years with cycloplegic spherical equivalent between +1.00 D to 0.00 D and astigmatism less than -1.00 D. The first recruited participant started treatment on July 11, 2017, and the last participant was enrolled on June 4, 2020; the date of the final follow-up session was June 4, 2022.
INTERVENTIONS
Participants were assigned at random to the 0.05% atropine (n = 160), 0.01% atropine (n = 159), and placebo (n = 155) groups and had eyedrops applied once nightly in both eyes over 2 years.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcomes were the 2-year cumulative incidence rate of myopia (cycloplegic spherical equivalent of at least -0.50 D in either eye) and the percentage of participants with fast myopic shift (spherical equivalent myopic shift of at least 1.00 D).
RESULTS
Of the 474 randomized patients (mean age, 6.8 years; 50% female), 353 (74.5%) completed the trial. The 2-year cumulative incidence of myopia in the 0.05% atropine, 0.01% atropine, and placebo groups were 28.4% (33/116), 45.9% (56/122), and 53.0% (61/115), respectively, and the percentages of participants with fast myopic shift at 2 years were 25.0%, 45.1%, and 53.9%. Compared with the placebo group, the 0.05% atropine group had significantly lower 2-year cumulative myopia incidence (difference, 24.6% [95% CI, 12.0%-36.4%]) and percentage of patients with fast myopic shift (difference, 28.9% [95% CI, 16.5%-40.5%]). Compared with the 0.01% atropine group, the 0.05% atropine group had significantly lower 2-year cumulative myopia incidence (difference, 17.5% [95% CI, 5.2%-29.2%]) and percentage of patients with fast myopic shift (difference, 20.1% [95% CI, 8.0%-31.6%]). The 0.01% atropine and placebo groups were not significantly different in 2-year cumulative myopia incidence or percentage of patients with fast myopic shift. Photophobia was the most common adverse event and was reported by 12.9% of participants in the 0.05% atropine group, 18.9% in the 0.01% atropine group, and 12.2% in the placebo group in the second year.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among children aged 4 to 9 years without myopia, nightly use of 0.05% atropine eyedrops compared with placebo resulted in a significantly lower incidence of myopia and lower percentage of participants with fast myopic shift at 2 years. There was no significant difference between 0.01% atropine and placebo. Further research is needed to replicate the findings, to understand whether this represents a delay or prevention of myopia, and to assess longer-term safety.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-IPR-15006883.
Topics: Child; Female; Humans; Male; Atropine; Disease Progression; Incidence; Mydriatics; Myopia; Ophthalmic Solutions; Refraction, Ocular; Age of Onset; Double-Blind Method; Child, Preschool
PubMed: 36786791
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.24162 -
Progress in Retinal and Eye Research Jul 2021There is rapidly expanding interest in interventions to slow myopia progression in children and teenagers, with the intent of reducing risk of myopia-associated... (Review)
Review
There is rapidly expanding interest in interventions to slow myopia progression in children and teenagers, with the intent of reducing risk of myopia-associated complications later in life. Despite many publications dedicated to the topic, little attention has been devoted to understanding 'efficacy' in myopia control and its application. Treatment effect has been expressed in multiple ways, making comparison between therapies and prognosis for an individual patient difficult. Available efficacy data are generally limited to two to three years making long-term treatment effect uncertain. From an evidence-based perspective, efficacy projection should be conservative and not extend beyond that which has been empirically established. Using this principle, review of the literature, data from our own clinical studies, assessment of demonstrated myopia control treatments and allowance for the limitations and context of available data, we arrive at the following important interpretations: (i) axial elongation is the preferred endpoint for assessing myopic progression; (ii) there is insufficient evidence to suggest that faster progressors, or younger myopes, derive greater benefit from treatment; (iii) the initial rate of reduction of axial elongation by myopia control treatments is not sustained; (iv) consequently, using percentage reduction in progression as an index to describe treatment effect can be very misleading and (v) cumulative absolute reduction in axial elongation (CARE) emerges as a preferred efficacy metric; (vi) maximum CARE that has been measured for existing myopia control treatments is 0.44 mm (which equates to about 1 D); (vii) there is no apparent superior method of treatment, although commonly prescribed therapies such as 0.01% atropine and progressive addition spectacles lenses have not consistently provided clinically important effects; (viii) while different treatments have shown divergent efficacy in the first year, they have shown only small differences after this; (ix) rebound should be assumed until proven otherwise; (x) an illusion of inflated efficacy is created by measurement error in refraction, sample bias in only treating 'measured' fast progressors and regression to the mean; (xi) decision to treat should be based on age of onset (or refraction at a given age), not past progression; (xii) the decreased risk of complications later in life provided by even modest reductions in progression suggest treatment is advised for all young myopes and, because of limitations of available interventions, should be aggressive.
Topics: Adolescent; Atropine; Child; Disease Progression; Eyeglasses; Humans; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular; Vision Tests
PubMed: 33253901
DOI: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100923 -
PloS One 2023To evaluate the efficacy of a myopia control spectacle lens (DIMS) at slowing the progression of myopia in a population of European children in comparison with 0.01%... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of a myopia control spectacle lens (DIMS) at slowing the progression of myopia in a population of European children in comparison with 0.01% atropine and combined DIMS and atropine.
METHODS
The study was a non-randomised experimenter-masked prospective controlled observational study of individuals aged 6-18 years with progressing myopia but no ocular pathology. Participants were allocated, according to patient/parent choice, to receive 0.01% atropine eyedrops, DIMS (Hoya® MiyoSmart®) spectacles, combined atropine+DIMS or single vision spectacle lenses (control group). The key outcome variables, cycloplegic autorefraction spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and axial length (AL), were measured at baseline and after three, six, and 12 months.
RESULTS
Of the 146 participants (mean age 10.3y ±3.2), 53 received atropine, 30 DIMS spectacles, 31 atropine+DIMS, and 32 single vision control spectacles. Generalized linear mixed model analysis revealed for SER, whilst controlling for age and SER at baseline, at each stage all treatment groups had significantly reduced progression compared with the control group (p<0.016). For AL, whilst controlling for baseline age and AL, at 6 and 12 months all treatment groups had significantly less progression than the control group (p<0.005). For SER only, in pairwise comparisons at 12 months the atropine+DIMS group had significantly reduced progression compared with the DIMS only and Atropine only groups (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
In a European population, DIMS and atropine are effective at reducing myopia progression and axial elongation in progressing myopia and are most successful at reducing myopia progression when used in combination.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Atropine; Eyeglasses; Prospective Studies; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular; Disease Progression
PubMed: 36795775
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281816 -
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual... May 2023Myopia is a dynamic and rapidly moving field, with ongoing research providing a better understanding of the etiology leading to novel myopia control strategies. In 2019,...
Myopia is a dynamic and rapidly moving field, with ongoing research providing a better understanding of the etiology leading to novel myopia control strategies. In 2019, the International Myopia Institute (IMI) assembled and published a series of white papers across relevant topics and updated the evidence with a digest in 2021. Here, we summarize findings across key topics from the previous 2 years. Studies in animal models have continued to explore how wavelength and intensity of light influence eye growth and have examined new pharmacologic agents and scleral cross-linking as potential strategies for slowing myopia. In children, the term premyopia is gaining interest with increased attention to early implementation of myopia control. Most studies use the IMI definitions of ≤-0.5 diopters (D) for myopia and ≤-6.0 D for high myopia, although categorization and definitions for structural consequences of high myopia remain an issue. Clinical trials have demonstrated that newer spectacle lens designs incorporating multiple segments, lenslets, or diffusion optics exhibit good efficacy. Clinical considerations and factors influencing efficacy for soft multifocal contact lenses and orthokeratology are discussed. Topical atropine remains the only widely accessible pharmacologic treatment. Rebound observed with higher concentration of atropine is not evident with lower concentrations or optical interventions. Overall, myopia control treatments show little adverse effect on visual function and appear generally safe, with longer wear times and combination therapies maximizing outcomes. An emerging category of light-based therapies for children requires comprehensive safety data to enable risk versus benefit analysis. Given the success of myopia control strategies, the ethics of including a control arm in clinical trials is heavily debated. IMI recommendations for clinical trial protocols are discussed.
Topics: Humans; Atropine; Myopia; Contact Lenses, Hydrophilic; Combined Modality Therapy; Refraction, Ocular; Disease Progression
PubMed: 37126356
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.64.6.7 -
Journal of the Formosan Medical... Dec 2022Orthokeratology (Ortho-K), atropine eye drops and combined atropine with Ortho-K are proven to be effective ways to prevent myopic progression in many studies, but there... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Orthokeratology (Ortho-K), atropine eye drops and combined atropine with Ortho-K are proven to be effective ways to prevent myopic progression in many studies, but there is scarce evidence regarding the comparative efficacy of different dosages of atropine,Ortho-K, and combined atropine with Ortho-K for childhood myopia.
METHODS
We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the relative efficacy of the aforementioned interventions for myopic progression; moreover, we calculated the surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) to determine the relative ranking of treatments.
RESULTS
We identified 19 randomized controlled trials (3435 patients). NMA revealed that 0.01%-1% atropine, Ortho-K, and 0.01% atropine combined with Ortho-K inhibited axial elongation (AL) over one year. For refractive change, SUCRA analysis revealed that the hierarchy was high-dose (0.5%-1%), moderate-dose (0.1%-0.25%), and low-dose (0.01%-0.05%) atropine. Regarding AL, SUCRA analysis revealed the following hierarchy: Ortho-K combined with 0.01% atropine, high-dose atropine, moderate-dose atropine, Ortho-K, and low-dose atropine.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, we found that atropine (0.01%-1%), Ortho-K, and 0.01% atropine combined with Ortho-K could significantly slow down myopia progression. The atropine efficacy followed a dose-related pattern; moreover, Ortho-K and low-dose atropine showed similar efficacy. There was a synergistic effect of using 0.01% atropine combined with Ortho-K, and it showed comparable efficacy to that of high-dose atropine.
Topics: Humans; Child; Orthokeratologic Procedures; Atropine; Axial Length, Eye; Network Meta-Analysis; Myopia
PubMed: 35688780
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2022.05.005 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022The myopia epidemic has become a global public health problem. Although myopia is progressing worldwide, the recent coronavirus infections 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has... (Review)
Review
The myopia epidemic has become a global public health problem. Although myopia is progressing worldwide, the recent coronavirus infections 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has spurred myopia progression. The current evidence-based treatments for humans are atropine eye drops, optical treatment with defocus, use of orthokeratology, extending proximity working distance, pausing from near work every half hour and increased time outside the home. Studies on myopia using animal models have been conducted for more than 40 years. In recent years, new mechanisms of myopia suppression have been revealed from animal experiments such as inflammation control, intraocular pressure control, light control, and the activity of early growth response protein 1 control. This mini-review provides a summary of the scientific evidence currently available on the control of myopia, and the possible treatments mitigating myopia.
Topics: Atropine; COVID-19; Disease Progression; Humans; Myopia; Ophthalmic Solutions
PubMed: 35619815
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.897600 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global public health problem, in terms of rates of uncorrected refractive error and significantly, an increased risk of visual impairment due to myopia-related ocular morbidity. Since myopia is usually detected in children before 10 years of age and can progress rapidly, interventions to slow its progression need to be delivered in childhood.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the comparative efficacy of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children using network meta-analysis (NMA). To generate a relative ranking of myopia control interventions according to their efficacy. To produce a brief economic commentary, summarising the economic evaluations assessing myopia control interventions in children. To maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE; Embase; and three trials registers. The search date was 26 February 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children aged 18 years or younger. Critical outcomes were progression of myopia (defined as the difference in the change in spherical equivalent refraction (SER, dioptres (D)) and axial length (mm) in the intervention and control groups at one year or longer) and difference in the change in SER and axial length following cessation of treatment ('rebound'). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods. We assessed bias using RoB 2 for parallel RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes: change in SER and axial length at one and two years. Most comparisons were with inactive controls.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 64 studies that randomised 11,617 children, aged 4 to 18 years. Studies were mostly conducted in China or other Asian countries (39 studies, 60.9%) and North America (13 studies, 20.3%). Fifty-seven studies (89%) compared myopia control interventions (multifocal spectacles, peripheral plus spectacles (PPSL), undercorrected single vision spectacles (SVLs), multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCL), orthokeratology, rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGP); or pharmacological interventions (including high- (HDA), moderate- (MDA) and low-dose (LDA) atropine, pirenzipine or 7-methylxanthine) against an inactive control. Study duration was 12 to 36 months. The overall certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Since the networks in the NMA were poorly connected, most estimates versus control were as, or more, imprecise than the corresponding direct estimates. Consequently, we mostly report estimates based on direct (pairwise) comparisons below. At one year, in 38 studies (6525 participants analysed), the median change in SER for controls was -0.65 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (mean difference (MD) 0.90 D, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.18), MDA (MD 0.65 D, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.03), LDA (MD 0.38 D, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.66), pirenzipine (MD 0.32 D, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.49), MFSCL (MD 0.26 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), PPSLs (MD 0.51 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82), and multifocal spectacles (MD 0.14 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21). By contrast, there was little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) or undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.15 D, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00) reduce progression. At two years, in 26 studies (4949 participants), the median change in SER for controls was -1.02 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (MD 1.26 D, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36), MDA (MD 0.45 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83), LDA (MD 0.24 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.31), pirenzipine (MD 0.41 D, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.69), MFSCL (MD 0.30 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41), and multifocal spectacles (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30). PPSLs (MD 0.34 D, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.76) may also reduce progression, but the results were inconsistent. For RGP, one study found a benefit and another found no difference with control. We found no difference in SER change for undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09). At one year, in 36 studies (6263 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.31 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.30), MDA (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.17), LDA (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.05), orthokeratology (MD -0.19 mm, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.15), MFSCL (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.09), pirenzipine (MD -0.10 mm, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02), PPSLs (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.03), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04). We found little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) or undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.05 mm, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) reduce axial length. At two years, in 21 studies (4169 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.56 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.47mm, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.34), MDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.20), orthokeratology (MD -0.28 mm, (95% CI -0.38 to -0.19), LDA (MD -0.16 mm, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.12), MFSCL (MD -0.15 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.12), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.03). PPSL may reduce progression (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.05) but results were inconsistent. We found little or no evidence that undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.03) or RGP (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12) reduce axial length. There was inconclusive evidence on whether treatment cessation increases myopia progression. Adverse events and treatment adherence were not consistently reported, and only one study reported quality of life. No studies reported environmental interventions reporting progression in children with myopia, and no economic evaluations assessed interventions for myopia control in children.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Studies mostly compared pharmacological and optical treatments to slow the progression of myopia with an inactive comparator. Effects at one year provided evidence that these interventions may slow refractive change and reduce axial elongation, although results were often heterogeneous. A smaller body of evidence is available at two or three years, and uncertainty remains about the sustained effect of these interventions. Longer-term and better-quality studies comparing myopia control interventions used alone or in combination are needed, and improved methods for monitoring and reporting adverse effects.
Topics: Humans; Child; Network Meta-Analysis; Myopia; Refractive Errors; Atropine; Refraction, Ocular
PubMed: 36809645
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014758.pub2 -
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 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to control myopia progression. In this systematic review, the primary outcomes were mean differences... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to control myopia progression. In this systematic review, the primary outcomes were mean differences (MD) between treatment and control groups in myopia progression (D) and axial length (AL) elongation (mm).
RESULTS
The following interventions were found to be effective ( < 0.001): highly aspherical lenslets (HAL, 0.80 D, 95% CI, 0.77-0.83; -0.35 mm, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.34), MiSight contact lenses (0.66 D, 95% CI, 0.63-0.69; -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.27), low dose atropine 0.05% (0.54 D, 95% CI, 0.38-0.70; -0.21 mm, 95% CI-0.28 to -0.14), Biofinity +2.50 D (0.45 D, 95% CI, 0.29, 0.61; -0.24 mm, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.15), defocus incorporated multiple segments [DIMS] (0.44 D, 95% CI, 0.42-0.46; -0.34 mm, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.33) and ortho-k lenses (-0.24 mm, 95% CI -0.33 to -01.5).
CONCLUSION
Low-dose atropine 0.01% was not effective in reducing AL progression in two studies. Treatment efficacy with low-dose atropine of 0.05% showed good efficacy. Spectacles (HAL and DIMS) and contact lenses (MiSight and Biofinity) may confer a comparable treatment benefit compared to atropine, to slow myopia progression.
Topics: Humans; Myopia; Atropine; Treatment Outcome; Contact Lenses; Eyeglasses
PubMed: 37033047
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1125000 -
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