Cochrane · systematic review · CD006460
Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia
Li, T, Qureshi, R, Taylor, K · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
Eyes and VisionAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 6 · 85.7%High 1 · 14.3%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Conventional occlusion compared to atropine penalization for amblyopia
Population: Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation amblyopia was not included
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mean visual acuity at 6 months (difference in LogMAR units between occlusion and atropine groups) Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 552 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Mean visual acuity at 24 months (difference in LogMAR units between occlusion and atropine groups) Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 483 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adherence to treatment (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (6, 12, 0r 24 months), and with different measures (percentage of prescribed treatment that was completed at each study ... Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 588 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Ocular alignment (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks, 24 months, or cessation of treatment) and by the proportions of participants who developed strabismus, showed chang... Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 888 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Stereo acuity (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks, 6 months, 2 years, or at cessation of treatment) and using different measures (TNO stereo test, Titmus fly test, Rando... Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 865 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Quality of life (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks or 6 months) by patient preference or the Amblyopia Treatment Index questionnaire. Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 256 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events (reported occurrence of: mild reduction in the visual acuity of the sound eye not requiring treatment; light sensitivity; skin, lid, or conjunctival irritation) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks or 2 years). Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 612 participants | High |