Trial reportIndian journal of ophthalmology2026
Enhancing presbyopia treatment: A comparative study of 1% Pilocarpine monotherapy versus combination with 0.09% Bromfenac.
Trial report in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2026. 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.
- Comments on "Enhancing presbyopia treatment: A comparative study of 1% Pilocarpine monotherapy versus combination with 0.09% bromfenac".Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPresbyopia, an age-related condition characterized by the gradual loss of near vision accommodation, affects a substantial portion of the global population. While Pilocarpine has demonstrated effectiveness in managing presbyopia, there is increasing interest in exploring combination therapies to enhance treatment efficacy and tolerability. PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of 1% Pilocarpine monotherapy versus a combination of 1% Pilocarpine and 0.09% Bromfenac for the treatment of presbyopia over an 8-week period.
methodsA prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted involving presbyopic patients who were assigned to one of two treatment groups. Evaluations were performed to assess near visual acuity, accommodative function, patient satisfaction, safety, and compliance.
resultsBoth treatment groups showed significant improvements in near vision function. At the 8-week mark, 44.1% of patients in the Pilocarpine-only group and 78.6% of those in the combination therapy group achieved N6 near vision. The combination therapy group exhibited superior results in near point of accommodation (NPA) and accommodative amplitude (P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction improved similarly in both groups. However, the combination therapy group reported fewer adverse events (1.8% vs. 11.9%, P < 0.05) and higher treatment compliance (96.4% vs. 64.4%, P < 0.001).
conclusionWhile both treatment regimens effectively improved near vision in patients with presbyopia, the combination of Pilocarpine and Bromfenac demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of accommodative function, safety profile, patient compliance, and a reduced need for glasses. These results suggest that this combination therapy may offer a more effective pharmacological approach to the management of presbyopia.
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.