Comparative Efficacy of Penalization Method in Moderate to Mild Amblyopia Original Reearch Article

Purpoe To compare the efficacy and enory outcome of pharmacologic and optical penalization in the treatment of moderate to mild amblyopia. Deign Randomized clinical trial. Method In an intitutional etting, two- to 10-year-old children with trabimic or aniometropic amblyopia (viual acuity in the amblyopic eye at leat 20/60) who were cooperative to meaure viual acuity uing the logarithm of the minimum angle of reolution (logMAR) crowded Glagow acuity card were randomized into two group of therapy (n = 35 in each group), 1% atropine, and optical penalization with poitive lene, after tratification by caue of amblyopia. Viual acuity wa teted by the logMAR crowded Glagow acuity card, after retinocopic refraction, and deviation angle were meaured by the imultaneou prim and cover or Krimky tet. tereoacuity wa determined uing the Titmu fly tet and Randot prechool or Randot circle tereoacuity tet. Change in viual acuity of the amblyopic eye and in interocular difference of viual acuity after ix month of amblyopia therapy wa the main outcome meaure; tereoacuity at ix month of therapy wa a econdary outcome meaure. Reult Thirty-one and 32 children completed the outcome examination in the atropine and optical penalization group, repectively. Average improvement in viual acuity of the amblyopic eye wa larger in the atropine than in the optical penalization group (3.4 and 1.8 logMAR line, repectively), a well a average improvement in interocular difference of viual acuity (2.8 and 1.3 logMAR line, repectively). Better tereoacuity, but nonignificantly different, wa detected in the atropine group. Concluion Atropine penalization may be conidered more effective than optical penalization with poitive lene.