Abstract： Objective: To investigate the curative effect of orthokeratology combined with visual training in juvenile myopia control. Methods: This is a prospective non-randomized case-control study. One hundred twenty patients (120 right eyes) qualified to wear the orthokeratology lenses were selected from patients in the Optometric Diagnosis and Treatment Center of Tangshan Eye Hospital from January 2018 to October 2018. Subjects were divided into 3 groups: 40 patients (40 eyes) for the visual training (VT) group, 40 patients (40 eyes) for the orthokeratology (Ortho-k) group, and 40 patients (40 eyes) for the orthokeratology combined with visual training (OCVT) group. Then the refractive error and the axial length (AL) growth of the three groups were measured and recorded one year later. One-way analysis of variance and multiple comparisons were used to compare the refractive error of myopic eye and the AL data of the three groups before and after intervention. Results: One year later, there were significant differences in the refractive error of myopic eye (F=5.597, P=0.006) and AL (F=6.354, P=0.003) among the three group. After conducting further multiple comparisons, the study found that the differences in the refractive error of myopic eye (P=0.001) and AL (P=0.001) were statistically significant between the VT group and OCVT group. The differences in the refractive error of myopic eye (P=0.036) and axial length (P=0.011) were statistically significant between the Ortho-k group and OCVT group. But there was no statistically significant difference between the VT group and Ortho-k group. Conclusions: Orthokeratology combined with visual training performs better than orthokeratology or visual training alone in juvenile myopia control, deserving further promotion in clinical practice.
Cui YH, Li L, Wu Q, et al. Myopia correction in children: A meta-analysis. Clin Invest Med, 2017, 40(3): E117-E126. DOI: 10.25011/cim.v40i3.28391.
[3]
Watanabe K, Hara N, Kimijima M, et al. One-year longitudinal change in parameters of myopic school children trained by a new accommodative training device-uncorrected visual acuity, refraction, axial length, accommodation,and pupil reaction. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi, 2012, 116(10): 929-936.
[4]
García-Muñoz Á, Carbonell-Bonete S, Cacho-Martínez P. Symptomatology associated with accommodative and binocular vision anomalies. J Optom, 2014, 7(4): 178-192. DOI: 10.1016/ j.optom.2014.06.005.
[5]
Holden BA, Fricke TR, Wilson DA, et al. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology, 2016, 123(5): 1036-1042. DOI: 10.1016/ j.ophtha.2016.01.006.
Chen Z, Zhou J, Qu X, et al. Effects of orthokeratology on axial length growth in myopic anisometropes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye, 2018, 41(3): 263-266. DOI: 10.1016/j. clae.2017.10.014.
[9]
Tsai WS, Wang JH, Lee YC, et al. Assessing the change of anisometropia in unilateral myopic children receiving monocular orthokeratology treatment. J Formos Medl Assoc, 2019, 118(7): 1122-1128. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2019.02.001.
[10]
Deng L, Gwiazda J, Thorn F. Children's refractions and visual activities in the school year and summer. Optom Vis Sci, 2010, 87(6): 406-413. DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181da8a85.
[11]
Attebo K, Mitchell P, Cumming R, et al. Prevalence and causes of amblyopia in an adult population. Ophthalmology, 1998, 105(1): 154-159. DOI: 10.1016/s0161-6420(98)91862-0.
浙公网安备 33030202001892号