Advertisement

Der Ophthalmologe

, Volume 116, Issue 12, pp 1231–1234 | Cite as

Therapiemonitoring und Innovationen in der Amblyopietherapie

  • Kai JanuschowskiEmail author
  • Caroline Emmerich
  • Annegret Abaza
  • Henrike Julich-Haertel
  • Annekatrin Rickmann
Das diagnostische und therapeutische Prinzip

Zusammenfassung

Trainingsspiele am PC oder Shutterbrillen eröffnen neue und elegante Therapiemöglichkeiten in der Amblyopiebehandlung. Jedoch besteht durch die oftmals fehlende Überwachung der Compliance keine wissenschaftliche Grundlage, auf der z. B. eine Vergleichsstudie zwischen einem neuen Therapieansatz und der bisherigen Okklusionstherapie basieren könnte. Dabei könnte ein Mikrosensor zur Messung der Compliance durch seine einfache Handhabbarkeit zu einem breiten Einsatz sowohl in der Wissenschaft als auch in der klinischen Routine kommen. In diesem Beitrag sollen die Möglichkeiten der aktuellen Innovationen dargestellt werden.

Schlüsselwörter

Okklusionstherapie Sehentwicklung Compliance Trageprotokoll Monitoring 

Treatment monitoring and innovations in amblyopia treatment

Abstract

Technical innovations, such as computer games and shutter glasses open up elegant treatment options for amblyopia. The lack of monitoring of compliance means that there is no scientific basis on which a comparative study between a new therapeutic approach and occlusion therapy as the standard of care could be designed. An easy to use microsensor for measurement of compliance could have a broad spectrum of applications in scientific studies as well as in routine clinical practice. This article gives a brief overview about emerging and innovative approaches.

Keywords

Occlusion therapy Visual development Compliance Usage protocol Monitoring 

Notes

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt

K. Januschowski, C. Emmerich, A. Abaza, H. Julich-Haertel und A. Rickmann geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Elflein HM, Fresenius S, Lamparter J et al (2015) The prevalenceof amblyopiain Germany: data from the prospective, population-based Gutenberg Health Study. Dtsch Arztebl Int.  https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0338 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maurer D, McKee SP (2018) Classification and diversity of amblyopia. Vis Neurosci.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952523817000190 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birch EE (2013) Amblyopia and binocular vision. Prog Retin Eye Res 33:67–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu C, Hunter DG (2006) Amblyopia: diagnostic and therapeutic options. Am J Ophthalmol 141:175–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bangerter A (2017) Treatment of amblyopia: part 1. Strabismus 25(4):222–230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Richards MD, Goltz HC, Wong AMF (2018) Audiovisual perception in amblyopia: a review and synthesis. Exp Eye Res.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2018.04.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Portela-Camino JA, Martín-González S, Ruiz-Alcocer J et al (2018) A random dot computer video game improves stereopsis. Optom Vis Sci 95(6):523–535PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berufsverband der Augenärzte e. V., DOG (2010) Leitlinie 26a Amblyopie. http://www.augeninfo.de/leit/leit26a.pdf;. Zugegriffen: 3. Sept. 2017Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    American Academy of Ophthalmology (2012) Amblyopia preferred practice pattern. https://www.aao.org/preferred-practicepattern/amblyopia-ppp-september-2012. Zugegriffen: 3. Sept. 2017Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holmes JM, Kraker RT, Beck RW et al (2003) A randomized trial of prescribed patching regimens for treatment of severe amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology 110:2075–2087PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wallace DK, Lazar EL, Crouch ER 3rd et al (2015) Time course and predictors of amblyopia improvement with 2 hours of daily patching. JAMA Ophthalmol 133(5):606–609PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group, Wallace DK, Lazar EL, Holmes JM et al (2013) A randomized trial of increasing patching for amblyopia. Ophthalmology 120(11):2270–2277Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stewart CE, Stephens DA, Fielder AR et al (2007) Modeling dose-response in amblyopia: toward a child-specific treatment plan. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48:2589–2594PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simonsz HJ, Polling JR, Voorn R et al (1999) Electronic monitoring of treatment compliance in patching for amblyopia. Strabismus 7(2):113–123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wallace MP, Stewart CE, Moseley MJ et al (2013) Compliance with occlusion therapy for childhood amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54(9):6158–6166PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Loudon SE, Fronius M, Looman CW et al (2006) Predictors and a remedy for noncompliance with amblyopia therapy in children measured with the occlusion dose monitor. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47(10):4393–4400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fronius M, Bachert I, Lüchtenberg M (2009) Electronic monitoring of occlusion treatment for amblyopia in patients aged 7 to 16 years. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 247(10):1401–1408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kracht J, Bachert I, Diehl CM et al (2010) Electronically recorded occlusion treatment in amblyopes older than 7 years: acuity gain after more than 4 months of treatment? Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 227(10):774–781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fronius M, Cirina L, Ackermann H et al (2014) Efficiency of electronically monitored amblyopia treatment between 5 and 16 years of age: new insight into declining susceptibility of the visual system. Vision Res 103:11–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maconachie GD, Farooq S, Bush G et al (2016) Association between adherence to glasses wearing during amblyopia treatment and improvement in visual acuity. JAMA Ophthalmol 134(12):1347–1353PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Loudon SE, Polling JR, Simonsz HJ (2003) Electronically measured compliance with occlusion therapy for amblyopia is related to visual acuity increase. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 241(3):176–180PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Awan M, Proudlock FA, Gottlob I (2005) A randomized controlled trial of unilateral strabismic and mixed amblyopia using occlusion dose monitors to record compliance. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46(4):1435–1439PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stewart CE, Stephens DA, Fielder AR et al (2007) Objectively monitored patching regimens for treatment of amblyopia: randomised trial. BMJ 335:707PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Januschowski K, Bechtold TE, Schott TC (2013) Measuring wearing times of glasses and ocular patches using a thermosensor device from Orthodontics. Acta Ophthalmol 91:e635–e640PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schramm C, Abaza A, Blumenstock G et al (2016) Limitations of the TheraMon®-microsensor in monitoring occlusion therapy. Acta Ophthalmol 94(8):e753–e756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fronius M, Chopovska Y, Nolden J et al (2006) Occlusion treatment for amblyopia: assessing the performance of the electronic occlusion dose monitor. Strabismus 14:65–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Benezra O, Herzog R, Cohen E et al (2007) Liquid crystal glasses: feasibility and safety of a new modality for treating amblyopia. Arch Ophthalmol 125:580–581PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Spierer A, Raz J, Benezra O et al (2015) Treating amblyopia with liquid crystal glasses: a pilot study. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51:3395–3398Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Erbağcı I, Okumuş S, Öner V et al (2015) Using liquid crystal glasses to treat ambyopia in children. J AAPOS 19(3):257–259PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang J, Neely DE, Galli J et al (2016) A pilot randomized clinical trial of intermittent occlusion therapy liquid crystal glasses versus traditional patching for treatment of moderate unilateral amblyopia. J AAPOS 20(4):326–331PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wang J, Jin J, Malik A et al (2019) Feasibility of monitoring compliance with intermittent occlusion therapy glasses for amblyopia treatment. J AAPOS.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2019.04.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kämpf U, Muchamedjarow F, Seiler T (2001) Supportive amblyopia treatment by means of computer games with background stimulation; a placebo controlled pilot study of 10 days. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 218(4):243–250PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kämpf U, Shamshinova A, Kaschtschenko T et al (2008) Long-term application of computer-based pleoptics in home therapy: selected results of a prospective multicenter study. Strabismus 16(4):149–158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bau V, Rose K, Pollack K et al (2012) Effectivity of an occlusion-supporting PC-based visual training programme by horizontal drifting sinus gratings in children with amblyopia. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 229(10):979–986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Li RW, Ngo C, Nguyen J, Levi DM (2011) Video-game play induces plasticity in the visual system of adults with amblyopia. PLoS Biol 9(8):e1001135PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vedamurthy I, Nahum M, Huang SJ et al (2015) A dichoptic custom-made action video game as a treatment for adult amblyopia. Vision Res 114:173–187PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hess RF, Thompson B (2015) Amblyopia and the binocular approach to its therapy. Vision Res 114:4–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group, Holmes JM, Manh VM, Lazar EL et al (2016) Effect of a binocular ipad game vs part-time patching in children aged 5 to 12 years with amblyopia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 134(12):1391–1400Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gao TY, Guo CX, Babu RJ et al (2018) Effectiveness of a binocular video game vs placebo video game for improving visual functions in older children, teenagers, and adults with amblyopia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 136:172–181PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kelly KR, Jost RM, Dao L et al (2016) Binocular iPad game vs patching for treatment of amblyopia in children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 134:1402–1408PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Handa T, Ishikawa H, Shoji N et al (2015) Modified iPad for treatment of amblyopia: a preliminary study. J AAPOS 19(6):552–554PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Astle AT, McGraw PV, Webb BS (2011) Recovery of stereo acuity in adults with amblyopia. BMJ Case Rep.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr.07.2010.3143 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ding J, Levi DM (2011) Recovery of stereopsis through perceptual learning in human adults with abnormal binocular vision. Proc Natl Acad Sci Usa 108:E733–E741PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xi J, Jia W, Feng L et al (2014) Perceptual learning improves stereoacuity in amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55:2384–2391PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vedamurthy I, Knill DC, Huang SJ et al (2016) Recovering stereo vision by squashing virtual bugs in a virtual reality environment. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371:20150264PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Okeke CO, Quigley HA, Jampel HD et al (2009) Adherence with topical glaucoma medication monitored electronically the Travatan Dosing Aid study. Ophthalmology 116(2):191–199PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Januschowski
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Caroline Emmerich
    • 1
  • Annegret Abaza
    • 2
  • Henrike Julich-Haertel
    • 1
  • Annekatrin Rickmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Augenklinik SulzbachKnappschaftsklinikum Sulzbach/SaarSulzbachDeutschland
  2. 2.Department für AugenheilkundeUniversitätsaugenklinik TübingenTübingenDeutschland
  3. 3.Klaus Heimann Eye Research Institute (KHERI)Sulzbach/SaarDeutschland

Personalised recommendations