Association between accommodative amplitudes and amblyopia

Visual parameter status as a predictive factor for the outcomes of occlusion therapy in anisometropic amblyopia

PURPOSE

The purpose is to compare visual parameters between normal and amblyopic eyes in anisometropic amblyopia and to find predictive factors for occlusion therapy.

METHODS

Sixty patients with anisometropic amblyopia between the ages of 5 and 25 years were enrolled in the prospective, longitudinal, and interventional study. Patients were selected based on no improvement with spectacle correction alone after 1 month of follow-up. Baseline parameters such as LogMAR visual acuity, LEA contrast sensitivity, TNO stereopsis test, online Farnsworth D-15 test for color vision, accommodation with RAF ruler, +2.00/-2.00 flipper test, and dynamic retinoscopy were recorded. All patients were treated with occlusion therapy depending on their grades of amblyopia. After 6 months of follow-up, improvement in visual acuity was recorded with a LogMAR chart and correlated with initial visual parameters. Paired "t" test, Chi-square test, independent "t" test, analysis of variance test were used as statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Visual functions such as contrast sensitivity, accommodative facility, near point of accommodation, and accommodative amplitude showed a statistically significant difference between normal and amblyopic eyes of anisometropic amblyopia patients, whereas color vision did not differ significantly between normal and amblyopic eyes. Sixty-seven percentage of patients had poor stereopsis. Eighty percentage of patients who were younger had improvement in final best-corrected visual acuity and these patients had better stereopsis, contrast sensitivity, and mild-to-moderate amblyopia on initial testing.

CONCLUSION

The age of the patient, degree of anisometropia, spherical equivalent in amblyopic eyes, stereopsis, contrast sensitivity values at initial presentation, and compliance to occlusion therapy were found to be positive predictive factors of occlusion therapy.

Fine visuomotor skills in amblyopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Amblyopia is characterised by reduced visual acuity, poor binocular sensory fusion, and impaired or absent stereoacuity. Understanding the extent to which amblyopia affects everyday task performance is important to quantifying the disease burden of amblyopia and can assist clinicians to understand patients' likely functional capability.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified published studies comparing fine visuomotor performance in either children or adults with amblyopia and those with normal binocular vision. The included studies (22 studies involving 835 amblyopes and 561 controls) reported results of self-perception patient reported outcome measures, tests of motor proficiency and video recorded reaching and grasping. The outcomes of 17 studies were grouped into four meta-analyses, with pooled results reported as standardised mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% CI.

RESULTS

Regardless of the cause of amblyopia (anisometropia, strabismus, mixed, deprivation), significant reduction in self-perception of physical competence and athletic competence (SMD=-0.74, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.25, p=0.003); fine motor skills scores (SMD=-0.86, 95% CI -1.27 to -0.45, p<0.0001); speed of visually guided reaching and grasping movements (SMD=0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.08, p<0.00001); and precision of temporal eye-hand coordination (SMD=0.75, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.25, p=0.003) occurred in amblyopes compared with those with normal visual development.

CONCLUSION

Reports of the impact of amblyopia on fine motor skills performance find poorer outcomes in participants with amblyopia compared with those with normal vision development. Consistency in the outcome measure used to assess the functional impact of amblyopia would be valuable for future studies.

Accommodative Lag Persistence in Treated Anisometropic, Strabismic, and Mixed Amblyopia

Background

Amblyopic eyes typically exhibit greater lag of accommodation. Whether this improves after amblyopia treatment is inconclusive. The aim of this study is to report post-treatment accommodative response in amblyopia and to investigate if the lag is associated with visual acuity, treatment duration, and amblyopia type.

Methods

Monocular and binocular accommodative responses were measured using Nott's method of dynamic retinoscopy in amblyopia of anisometropic, strabismic, and combined anisometropic-strabismic types and age-matched controls with normal vision. The results were compared using the nonparametric Wilcoxon signed ranks test. Linear regression analysis was used to examine association of the lag to refractive error, duration of therapy, and visual acuity.

Results

Mean ± SD age of 46 amblyopic and 20 control subjects were 6.9 ± 1.8 and 6.9 ± 2.2 years, respectively. At the time of the study, 30 amblyopic subjects were receiving patching therapy and ceased in the remainder. In amblyopic eyes, mean ± SD monocular and binocular lags were 1.2 ± 0.6D and 1.0 ± 0.5D (p < 0.001), respectively, compared to 0.6 ± 0.3D and 0.5 ± 0.2D (p < 0.005), respectively, in nonamblyopic eyes and 0.4 ± 0.2D and 0.3 ± 0.2D (p=0.093), respectively, in the controls. By types, the monocular lag was significantly higher than the binocular lag (p=0.001) in mixed amblyopia (p=0.004); they were similar in anisometropic (p=0.283) and strabismic (p=0.743) amblyopia. Monocular lag was significantly correlated to BCVA (r = 0.46; p=0.001) and refraction (r = 0.42; p=0.001) but not to patching duration (r = 0.1; p=0.280).

Conclusion

Inadequate accommodative response, a higher lag, persists in amblyopic eyes even after the treatment. Impaired accommodative response is partly determined by posttherapy visual acuity. Further studies investigating the effect of accommodative lag on visual recovery and whether optical correction of the deficiency may improve visual outcome of the treatment are recommended.

Repeatability of the Accommodative Response Measured by the Grand Seiko Autorefractor in Children With and Without Amblyopia and Adults

PURPOSE

To assess test-retest repeatability of the accommodative response (AR) in children with and without amblyopia and adults using the Grand Seiko autorefractor.

DESIGN

Prospective reliability assessment.

METHODS

Test-retest of accommodation was obtained while participants viewed 20/150 sized letters at 33 cm using the Grand Seiko autorefractor in children 5 to <11 years with amblyopia (n=24) and without amblyopia (n=36), and adults 18 to <35 years (n=34). Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess repeatability and reliability. The AR between the fellow and amblyopic eyes of children with amblyopia and eye 1 and eye 2 of the visually normal participants was assessed using group comparisons.

RESULTS

The 95% LOA of the AR was greatest in the amblyopic eyes (-1.25 diopters [D], 1.62 D) of children with amblyopia. The 95% LOA were similar between the fellow eyes (-0.88 D, 0.74 D) of children with amblyopia and both eyes of the children without amblyopia (eye 1: -0.68 D, 0.71 D; eye 2: -0.59 D, 0.70 D) and the adults (eye 1: 95% LOA = -0.49 D, 0.45 D; eye 2: LOA = -0.66 D, 0.67 D). ICCs revealed the Grand Seiko autorefractor as a reliable instrument for measuring AR.

CONCLUSIONS

The Grand Seiko autorefractor was more repeatable and reliable when measuring the AR in children and adults without amblyopia than in the amblyopic eye in children with amblyopia. It is recommended that multiple measures of the AR be obtained in amblyopic eyes to improve the precision of measures.

Performance of Glow Fixation GoCheck Kids and 2WIN Photoscreeners and Retinomax to Uncover Hyperopia

Background

A low-detail, glowing fixation device was added to GoCheck Kids (GCK) photoscreener in the hope of unmasking hyperopia and amblyopia risk factors (ARF).

Methods

Pediatric eye patients were screened by GCK and 2WIN photoscreeners, and Retinomax autorefractor before being compared to AAPOS ARFs.

Results

Screening was attempted by 131 children who then had school bus accommodation-relaxing skiascopy (SBA-RS) before cycloplegic examination. By 2013 AAPOS uniform guidelines, sensitivity/specificity for GCK was 87%/68%, for 2WIN 87%/71% and for Retinomax 79%/68%. Detection of amblyopia had sensitivity/specificity by GCK of 78%/63%, for 2WIN 79%/65% and for Retinomax 77%/68%. Inconclusive screens were seven for GCK, six for 2WIN and 13 for Retinomax. Mean hyperopia for GCK (+2.49±0.74 D) was similar to cycloplegic refraction (+2.93±0.72 D) and SBA-RS (+2.80±0.82 D) while GCK was slightly more than Retinomax (+1.59±0.93 D, p=0.13) but significantly more than 2WIN (+1.02±0.49 D, p<0.01).

Conclusion

GCK, 2WIN and Retinomax had similar validity detecting uniform amblyopia risk factors and amblyopia itself. The nondetailed glow fixation device allowed GCK to uncover substantial hyperopia while the detailed flashing fixation devices on 2WIN and Retinomax seemed to stimulate accommodation in some hyperopic children.

Clinical Trials Registry

NCT04297969. Data Access: http://www.abcd-vision.org/references/GCK%20glow%202WIN%20deidentify.pdf.

Précis

A glow fixation device on a smart phone photoscreener allowed robust detection of hyperopia.

Psychomotor, Psychosocial and Reading Skills in Children with Amblyopia and the Effect of Different Treatments

Amblyopia influences psychomotor and psychosocial skills, although not all studies are unanimous. Different treatments coexist, but the effect on those variables is not clear. This study aims to probe whether children with amblyopia have impairments in these areas and if different optometric treatments reduce them effectively. 50 children, diagnosed with amblyopia, and 33 without amblyopia participated in this study. Eye-hand coordination, psychosocial skills and reading abilities, were measured before and after three months of different treatments (patch, patch and near vision activities and perceptual learning). Results revealed lower scores in eye-hand coordination and some reading issues in children with amblyopia, without differences in psychosocial skills in regard to the control group. Moreover, optometric treatments improved eye-hand coordination.

Longitudinal Evaluation of Accommodation During Treatment for Unilateral Amblyopia

Purpose

Retinal image quality is dependent on accommodative performance. This longitudinal observational study of children with unilateral amblyopia evaluated the accommodative performance of the amblyopic eye during treatment.

Methods

Twenty-six participants with unilateral amblyopia and 10 participants with typical vision aged 3 to 10 years participated. Accommodative response was measured using modified Nott retinoscopy in monocular and binocular viewing conditions for target distances of 50, 33, and 25 cm, at enrollment and each follow-up visit.

Results

Participants with amblyopia accommodated less accurately when viewing with their amblyopic eye in monocular than in binocular conditions. Over the course of amblyopia treatment, accommodative performance improved with amblyopic eye visual acuity (VA) improvement, although this was not consistent across individual participants. A linear mixed model showed that accommodative error worsened with increasing depth of amblyopia for monocular viewing with the amblyopic eye (0.14 diopter [D] per line of acuity loss, P = 0.001), with an interaction between VA and stimulus demand (0.09 D of additional lag per diopter of stimulus, per line of acuity loss, P < 0.001). Participant age, patching duration, length of time in the study, history of strabismus, and stereoacuity were not significant predictors of accommodative performance.

Conclusions

Overall, poor monocular accommodative performance of the amblyopic eye was associated with worse amblyopia and improved simultaneously with VA improvement, although there was variability across the study cohort. Further research is needed to determine the causal relationship between amblyopic eye VA and accommodation and its impact on amblyopia treatment.

Amblyopia in High Accommodative Convergence/Accommodation Ratio Accommodative Esotropia. Influence of Bifocals on Treatment Outcome

PURPOSE

To study the influence of bifocal use on amblyopia treatment outcome in high accommodative convergence/accommodation (AC/A) ratio accommodative esotropia with deviation only at near.

DESIGN

Retrospective comparative case series.

METHODS

Setting: Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Children with high AC/A ratio accommodative esotropia aged 3-8 years old, with deviation only at near with glasses, neutralized with bifocal lenses (follow-up 1 year).

INTERVENTION

Amblyopia was treated with patching. We compared bifocal and single-vision glasses users at 6 months and 1 year, with control of potential confounding variables (multiple regression).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

LogMAR lines of improvement in visual acuity of the amblyopic eye, and improvement in stereoacuity.

RESULTS

Of 78 children, 61 were eligible. All patients wore single-vision glasses for 2 months (baseline visit), 46 of them changed to bifocals. Of 27 initially amblyopic children, 21 remained amblyopic at 2-month baseline (13 of them changed to bifocals). After adjustment for initial deviation, refraction, age, and amblyopia, improvement of visual acuity in the amblyopic eye was larger in the bifocal vs single-vision group at 6 months (mean 2.6 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9-2.9] logMAR lines vs mean 1.9 [95% CI: 0.5-2.2] logMAR lines, respectively, P = .01), but not at 1 year (mean 2.7 [95% CI: 2.2-3.1] logMAR lines vs mean 2.3 [95% CI: 1.6-3.1] logMAR lines, respectively, P = .3). Improvement of stereoacuity was not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of bifocals may provide a transient advantage, but improvement in visual acuity and stereopsis is equal with single-vision glasses over time.

Clinical application of accommodating intraocular lens

The present review describes recent advances in application of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs). Standard monofocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) only correct distance vision, while AIOLs are designed to allow both good distance vision and near vision, which is achieved through the contraction and relaxation of ciliary muscles by providing transformation of the axial movement or curvature of the lens. Thus, AIOLs may be a better choice for those patients who demand a higher level of visual performance. Since techniques to analyze the performance of AIOLs have not been standardized, and there is a variety of both subjective and objective methods, it is hard to measure the performance of these intraocular lenses. By evaluating advantages and disadvantages of various AIOLs, and introducing techniques for measurement the performance postoperative, this paper can provide some relative information on choosing the type of AIOLs in the clinic.