Effect of COVID ‐19 home confinement on the efficacy of orthokeratology, 0.01% atropine and combined treatment

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of COVID-19 home confinement on the efficacy of the interventions for controlling myopia, and to select effective therapies to control myopia during COVID-19 confinement. METHOD: Children (n = 164) aged 8-12 years with spherical equivalent refraction of -1.00 to -6.00 diopters were stratified into two age subgroups and randomly allocated into the control, 0.01% atropine, orthokeratology (ortho-k) and atropine combined ortho-k (ACO) groups. Axial length (AL) was measured at baseline, 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month visits. The follow-up spanned the period before the COVID-19 outbreak, the period of the home confinement, and the period of the school reopening. Hence, the AL change in different periods was collected and compared. Data analysis was performed following the criteria of intention to treat (ITT). RESULTS: All 164 children were involved in the ITT analysis. Compared to control, all interventions can still reduce the AL elongation during the COVID-19 home confinement period (all p < 0.05). However, the efficacy was compromised: individuals experienced more AL elongation during the COVID-19 home confinement period in the control, 0.01% atropine and ACO groups (all p < 0.05). Interestingly, in the ortho-k group, the difference was insignificant (p = 0.178), and the interaction between the intervention type (control vs. ortho-k) and the confinement severity was significant (p for interaction = 0.041), which is different from the atropine (p for interaction = 0.248) or ACO group (p for interaction = 0.988). These results were stable after being adjusted by other variables based on the multivariable regression model. CONCLUSION: Ortho-k was less affected by the COVID-19 home confinement, which is potentially a better therapy for children in this high-risk environment. Further investigations are warranted to validate this issue.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.