Comparison of the efficacy and clinical applications of three different myopia control methods: repeated low-level red light, 1% atropine, and orthokeratology lenses in children and adolescent.

backgroundCurrently, the mainstream methods for myopia control include atropine, orthokeratology lenses(OK lens), and repeated low-level red light (RLRL). In-depth exploration of different intervention methods are of great significance.

methods600 participants aged 8-16 years with a spherical equivalent (SE) of - 0.50 to - 7.50 D (D) completed 8 months treatment. They were divided into four groups: the RLRL, 1% atropine, OK lens and control (single-vision spectacles [SVS]) group. Each group comprised 150 patients .

resultsAt baseline, the difference was not statistically significant in the AL of the RLRL, 1% atropine, OK, and SVS groups (P > 0.05); After 8 months, significant differences were observed between the OK group and the RLRL, 1% atropine, SVS groups (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was found between the RLRL and 1% atropine groups. In the RLRL group, the difference in axial length (AL) progression between low myopia(LM) and high myopia(HM) subgroups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). the corneal curvature KI and K2 were statistically nonsignificant before and after the intervention(P > 0.05).At baseline, the SEs were not significantly different (P > 0.05). After 8 months. the OK, RLRL, and 1% atropine groups showed statistically significant differences in SE compared to the SVS group (P < 0 0.05).

conclusionRLRL, 1% atropine, and OK lenses were effective in controlling AL and SE increase compared with SVS, with RLRL and 1% atropine exhibiting better outcomes than OK lenses. KEY MESSAGES: WHAT IS KNOWN: Repeated low-level red light (RLRL), 1% atropine, and OK lenses were effective in controlling AL and SE increase in children and adolescents, and RLRL therapy has emerged as a novel therapy for myopia control with unexpected efficacy in axial shortening. WHAT IS NEW: Comprehensively analyzed the effectiveness and safety of three different myopia control strategies. RLRL was effective at controlling myopia progression according to different myopia regions, the decreases in AL in the longer AL group were greater than those in the shorter group. At the same time, our study further demonstrates that the differential efficacy of three myopia intervention regimens in patients with low, moderate, and high myopia.