The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization

Michael X Repka, J. M. Ray, L. Tychsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Optical and pharmacological penalization of sound eyes are infrequently used alternatives to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors evaluated the efficacy of penalization as their primary treatment of amblyopia. Methods: One hundred sixty-six patients underwent penalization treatment for strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia for a minimum of 3 months. Both atropine and optical penalization methods were used. Results: Visual acuity improved in 67 (77%) of 87 patients treated with optical penalization. There was a significant improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/38 to 20/28 (P <0.001). Visual acuity of 60 (76%) of 79 patients treated with pharmacological penalization improved. There was a significant improvement of mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/61 to 20/40 (P <0.001). Neither therapy produced an instance of occlusion amblyopia. Thirteen patients discontinued therapy because of blur or discomfort. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that penalization methods are effective methods for the treatment of amblyopia, with a low risk of occlusion amblyopia. Patient acceptance of these methods was excellent. Penalization should be considered more often for the primary treatment of amblyopia.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)769-775
Number of pages7
JournalOphthalmology
Volume100
Issue number5
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

Amblyopia
Pharmacology
Visual Acuity
Therapeutics
Atropine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Repka, M. X., Ray, J. M., & Tychsen, L. (1993). The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization. Ophthalmology, 100(5), 769-775.

The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization. / Repka, Michael X; Ray, J. M.; Tychsen, L.

In: Ophthalmology, Vol. 100, No. 5, 1993, p. 769-775.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Repka, MX, Ray, JM & Tychsen, L 1993, 'The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization', Ophthalmology, vol. 100, no. 5, pp. 769-775.
Repka, Michael X ; Ray, J. M. ; Tychsen, L. / The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization. In: Ophthalmology. 1993 ; Vol. 100, No. 5. pp. 769-775.
@article{9bfce1eb94ea4b09b6079462936e8d55,
title = "The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization",
abstract = "Purpose: Optical and pharmacological penalization of sound eyes are infrequently used alternatives to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors evaluated the efficacy of penalization as their primary treatment of amblyopia. Methods: One hundred sixty-six patients underwent penalization treatment for strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia for a minimum of 3 months. Both atropine and optical penalization methods were used. Results: Visual acuity improved in 67 (77{\%}) of 87 patients treated with optical penalization. There was a significant improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/38 to 20/28 (P <0.001). Visual acuity of 60 (76{\%}) of 79 patients treated with pharmacological penalization improved. There was a significant improvement of mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/61 to 20/40 (P <0.001). Neither therapy produced an instance of occlusion amblyopia. Thirteen patients discontinued therapy because of blur or discomfort. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that penalization methods are effective methods for the treatment of amblyopia, with a low risk of occlusion amblyopia. Patient acceptance of these methods was excellent. Penalization should be considered more often for the primary treatment of amblyopia.",
author = "Repka, {Michael X} and Ray, {J. M.} and L. Tychsen",
year = "1993",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "100",
pages = "769--775",
journal = "Ophthalmology",
issn = "0161-6420",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The efficacy of optical and pharmacological penalization

AU - Repka, Michael X

AU - Ray, J. M.

AU - Tychsen, L.

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - Purpose: Optical and pharmacological penalization of sound eyes are infrequently used alternatives to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors evaluated the efficacy of penalization as their primary treatment of amblyopia. Methods: One hundred sixty-six patients underwent penalization treatment for strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia for a minimum of 3 months. Both atropine and optical penalization methods were used. Results: Visual acuity improved in 67 (77%) of 87 patients treated with optical penalization. There was a significant improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/38 to 20/28 (P <0.001). Visual acuity of 60 (76%) of 79 patients treated with pharmacological penalization improved. There was a significant improvement of mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/61 to 20/40 (P <0.001). Neither therapy produced an instance of occlusion amblyopia. Thirteen patients discontinued therapy because of blur or discomfort. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that penalization methods are effective methods for the treatment of amblyopia, with a low risk of occlusion amblyopia. Patient acceptance of these methods was excellent. Penalization should be considered more often for the primary treatment of amblyopia.

AB - Purpose: Optical and pharmacological penalization of sound eyes are infrequently used alternatives to occlusion for treating amblyopia. The authors evaluated the efficacy of penalization as their primary treatment of amblyopia. Methods: One hundred sixty-six patients underwent penalization treatment for strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia for a minimum of 3 months. Both atropine and optical penalization methods were used. Results: Visual acuity improved in 67 (77%) of 87 patients treated with optical penalization. There was a significant improvement of the geometric mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/38 to 20/28 (P <0.001). Visual acuity of 60 (76%) of 79 patients treated with pharmacological penalization improved. There was a significant improvement of mean visual acuity of the amblyopic eyes from 20/61 to 20/40 (P <0.001). Neither therapy produced an instance of occlusion amblyopia. Thirteen patients discontinued therapy because of blur or discomfort. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that penalization methods are effective methods for the treatment of amblyopia, with a low risk of occlusion amblyopia. Patient acceptance of these methods was excellent. Penalization should be considered more often for the primary treatment of amblyopia.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027168363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027168363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 100

SP - 769

EP - 775

JO - Ophthalmology

JF - Ophthalmology

SN - 0161-6420

IS - 5

ER -