Shah Bhavin M, Sharma Pradeep, Menon Vimla, Saxena Rohit, Singh Jai Pal
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
J AAPOS. 2011 Jun;15(3):245-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2010.12.020.
To compare cycloplegic efficacy of homatropine and atropine in pediatric refractions and derive a regression formula to calculate refraction findings for both agents.
Children between the ages of 4 to 10 years with refractive error underwent cycloplegic refraction with 2% homatropine and 1% atropine by retinoscopy and automated refraction. Refractive data were compared by the use of power vector analysis. Primary outcome measures were spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatic components of refractive error (J(0) and J(45)), overall blur strength of refractive error, and residual accommodation.
A total of 63 children with refractive error were enrolled (mean age, 6.7 ± 1.6 years). Compared with homatropine, atropine uncovered significantly greater hyperopic SE in patients with hypermetropia (4.2 ± 2.5 D [atropine] vs 3.5 ± 2.3 D [homatropine]; P < 0.001) as well as myopia (-1.8 ± 1.4 D [atropine] vs -2.1 ± 1.4 D [homatropine]; P < 0.001). Overall blur strength was significantly greater with atropine (3.1 ± 2.1 [atropine] vs 2.9 ± 1.9 [homatropine]; P = 0.003). Homatropine had a significantly greater residual accommodation (1.8 ± 0.4 D [atropine] vs 3.1 ± 0.5 D [homatropine]; P < 0.001). A regression formula was derived.
Of the 2 cycloplegic agents, atropine yielded more consistent results than homatropine; however atropine had a relatively slow onset and prolonged effect. Our regression formula may make it possible to derive atropine-like results while using the clinically more versatile homatropine.
比较后马托品和阿托品在儿童验光中的睫状肌麻痹效果,并推导一个回归公式来计算两种药物的验光结果。
对4至10岁屈光不正儿童进行睫状肌麻痹验光,分别使用2%后马托品和1%阿托品,通过检影验光和自动验光。使用屈光力矢量分析比较屈光数据。主要观察指标为等效球镜度(SE)、屈光不正的散光成分(J(0)和J(45))、屈光不正的总体模糊度以及残余调节。
共纳入63例屈光不正儿童(平均年龄6.7±1.6岁)。与后马托品相比,阿托品在远视患者中发现的远视等效球镜度显著更高(4.2±2.5 D[阿托品]对3.5±2.3 D[后马托品];P<0.001),在近视患者中也是如此(-1.8±1.4 D[阿托品]对-2.1±1.4 D[后马托品];P<0.001)。阿托品的总体模糊度显著更高(3.1±2.1[阿托品]对2.9±1.9[后马托品];P = 0.003)。后马托品的残余调节显著更高(1.8±0.4 D[阿托品]对3.1±0.5 D[后马托品];P<0.001)。推导了一个回归公式。
在这两种睫状肌麻痹药物中,阿托品产生的结果比后马托品更一致;然而,阿托品起效相对较慢且作用持续时间较长。我们的回归公式可能使在使用临床上更通用的后马托品时获得类似阿托品的结果成为可能。