ArticleAdvances in rehabilitation science and practice
Amblyopia rehabilitation: A preliminary study on the efficacy of an alternative therapeutic method within Italian patients.
Article in Advances in rehabilitation science and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Amblyopia is the medical term for a "lazy eye." It occurs when vision in one or both eyes does not develop properly during childhood even though there is no structural abnormality of the eye. It consists of an interocular difference of two lines or more in a visual acuity table (without specifying any), or visual acuity worse than or equal to 20/30 Snellen Feet equivalent to 0.2 LogMAR, with the best optical correction. (American Academy of Ophthalmology) Patching is the international gold standard amblyopia treatment, based on a monocular stimulation of the eye with lower vision. It needs high compliance and a long period of treatment during plastic age. The purpose of our work is to evaluate the efficiency of a different and faster method for amblyopia rehabilitation, useful even for patients out of the plastic age: specifically homebased binocular rehabilitation therapy through specific smartphone/tablet games combined with anagliphyc glasses. This method, due to its ease of use, high compliance and cheap cost, could reach a great number of patients that until now have the risk of being abandoned if they are not able, for different reason, to follow the others common therapies. Methods: Fifty-five patients: mean age 8.98 ± 5.38, underwent ophthalmologic and orthoptic evaluations for amblyopia: BVCA with ETDRS logMAR, stereoacuity with Lang Stereotest I, ocular motility examination, fundus oculi and cycloplegic refraction examination. Eligible children had ⩾0.2 (as applicable) logMAR interocular difference, or BVCA worse or equal to 0.2 LogMAR. Patients were rehabilitated with specific dichoptic treatment by digital videogames for 1 hour/day for 2 months. Children wore red-blue anaglyphic glasses to play the games (with low-contrast components visible to 1 eye and high-contrast components visible to the other eye) for 7 hours per week (1 hour per day) for 8 weeks, with 2 outcome examinations programmed by protocol at 4 and 8 weeks from baseline. Results: After 8 weeks of treatment, amblyopic eye BCVA improved from 0.28 ± 0.13 logMAR at baseline to 0.10 ± 0.09 ( Conclusion: Achieved results relating to visual acuity improvements using binocular rehabilitation by digital videogames were statistically significant and encouraging. It is important that research and experimentation does not cease at this stage. Larger sample sizes, extended rehabilitation treatment periods and longer follow-up must be undertaken, in order to obtain objective data relating to visual acuity maintenance and also to obtained visual acuity results linked to age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.