Foley-Nolan A, McCann A, O'Keefe M
Children's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 Jan;81(1):54-7. doi: 10.1136/bjo.81.1.54.
AIMS/BACKGROUND: Pharmacological penalisation of non-amblyopic eyes is an infrequently used alternative to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors compared the efficacy of atropine penalisation and that of occlusion as a primary treatment for amblyopia.
Thirty six newly diagnosed patients with amblyopia were allocated to two groups for treatment. Eighteen patients in each group were treated either with atropine penalisation (group A) or occlusion therapy (group P).
There was a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity in both groups treated. In group A improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eye was from 6/50 to 6/11 (p < 0.001). In group P improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity was from 6/60 to 6/19 (p < 0.001). In group A non-compliance with treatment was only 6% (2/18). Non-compliance in group P was 45% (8/18) at some stages of the treatment. Neither group produced an incidence of occlusion amblyopia.
In this study atropine penalisation has been shown to be as effective as occlusion therapy in the treatment of amblyopia. Patient acceptance of atropine penalisation was superior to that for occlusion therapy as was shown by the compliance rate. Atropine treatment was also advantageous in that compliance could be readily checked by inspection.
目的/背景：对非弱视眼进行药物抑制是一种治疗弱视的方法，相较于遮盖疗法，其使用频率较低。作者比较了阿托品抑制疗法与遮盖疗法作为弱视主要治疗方法的疗效。
36例新诊断的弱视患者被分为两组进行治疗。每组18例患者，分别接受阿托品抑制疗法（A组）或遮盖疗法（P组）。
两组治疗后视力均有统计学意义上的显著改善。A组弱视眼的几何平均视力从6/50提高到6/11（p<0.001）。P组几何平均视力从6/60提高到6/19（p<0.001）。A组治疗不依从率仅为6%（2/18）。P组在治疗的某些阶段不依从率为45%（8/18）。两组均未发生遮盖性弱视。
在本研究中，阿托品抑制疗法在治疗弱视方面已被证明与遮盖疗法同样有效。从依从率来看，患者对阿托品抑制疗法的接受度优于遮盖疗法。阿托品治疗的优势还在于通过检查可容易地核实依从情况。
