Measuring aniseikonia and investigating neuroplasticity and image factors in amblyopia (MAGNIFY): study protocol for a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Aniseikonia represents a potential barrier to neuroplasticity which may limit visual outcomes in children with anisometropic amblyopia. Full correction of refractive error is the first step in standard amblyopia treatment, which corrects for image focus but neglects image size differences. METHODS: The MAGNIFY study is a double-masked, randomised clinical trial investigating the effectiveness of aniseikonia correcting lenses in children at first diagnosis of significant anisometropia. We hypothesis that aniseikonia correction lenses will improve image clarity and reduce the retinal size differences producing better visual acuity and stereoacuity improvements after 15 weeks of optical treatment for children with anisometropia. Eligible children will be randomly allocated to the treatment group (aniseikonia-correcting spectacle lenses) or control group (standard spectacle lenses). Visual acuity and binocular functions will be assessed every 5 weeks during the 15-week optical treatment phase according to standard amblyopia treatment protocol. DISCUSSION: It is possible that correcting aniseikonia along with anisometropia at first diagnosis will promote binocularity as well as increase spectacle adherence by reducing visual discomfort, improving optical treatment outcomes. This could then reduce the need for additional amblyopia treatment such as patching or atropine, reducing the burden on hospital eye departments and potentially improving visual outcomes for children with amblyopia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620000061932 . Registered on 24 January 2020. Protocol 15th November 2019, version one.

Development of a Spectacle Wear Monitor System: SpecsOn Monitor.

Purpose: This study aimed to custom design, build, and test a removable device that accurately and objectively monitors adherence to spectacle wear in preschool children participating in clinical trials. This work will provide researchers with the tools to investigate the effect of adherence to optical treatment in conditions relating to refractive error, such as anisometropia, amblyopia, myopia, and accommodative esotropia, where spectacle wearing behaviors are of interest. Methods: Several sensors were considered in the design of the SpecsOn monitor. The final version included two temperature sensors, one that measures skin temperature through an infrared sensor directed at the wearer's temple on the spectacle arm and the other measuring device temperature. The difference between the two temperature readings is used to determine if the spectacles were worn. The SpecsOn monitor was tested in two phases in adult participants (laboratory n = 10 and real world n = 5). Results: Results from both phases showed good agreement between the objective measurement of wear based on skin and device temperature differences and participants' manually logged wear times. The custom built SpecsOn monitor was 99% successful in accurately detecting spectacle wear in our adult cohort. Conclusions: The SpecsOn monitor offers a convenient, accurate, and reliable system to monitor spectacle adherence. The devices were comfortable, secure, and unobtrusive to wear, and fitted easily to a variety of frame styles. Translational Relevance: Easy access to spectacle compliance information from the SpecsOn monitor during the optical treatment phase will optimize visual outcomes and provide detailed clinical data to support decision making on the need and timing of additional therapies, improving treatment efficiency.

Adherence to home-based videogame treatment for amblyopia in children and adults.

Clinical relevance: Home-based videogame treatments are increasingly popular for amblyopia treatment. However, at-home treatments tend to be done in short sessions and with frequent disruptions, which may reduce the effectiveness of binocular visual stimulation. These treatment adherence patterns need to be accounted for when considering dose-response relationships and treatment effectiveness.Background: Home-based videogame treatments are increasingly being used for various sensory conditions, including amblyopia ('lazy eye'), but treatment adherence continues to limit success. To examine detailed behavioural patterns associated with home-based videogame treatment, we analysed in detail the videogame adherence data from the Binocular tReatment of Amblyopia with VideOgames (BRAVO) clinical trial (ACTRN12613001004752).Methods: Children (7-12 years), teenagers (13-17 years) and adults (≥ 18 years) with unilateral amblyopia were loaned iPod Touch devices with either an active treatment or placebo videogame and instructed to play for a total of 1-2 hours/day for six weeks at home. Objectively-recorded adherence data from device software were used to analyse adherence patterns such as session length, daily distribution of gameplay, use of the pause function, and differences between age groups. Objectively-recorded adherence was also compared to subjectively-reported adherence from paper-based diaries.Results: One hundred and five of the 115 randomised participants completed six weeks of videogame training. Average adherence was 65% (SD 37%) of the minimum hours prescribed. Game training was generally performed in short sessions (mean 21.5, SD 11.2 minutes), mostly in the evening, with frequent pauses (median every 4.1 minutes, IQR 6.1). Children played in significantly shorter sessions and paused more frequently than older age groups (p < 0.0001). Participants tended to over-report adherence in subjective diaries compared to objectively-recorded gameplay time.Conclusion: Adherence to home-based videogame treatment was characterised by short sessions interspersed with frequent pauses, suggesting regular disengagement. This complicates dose-response calculations and may interfere with the effectiveness of treatments like binocular treatments for amblyopia, which require sustained visual stimulation.

Clinical Aniseikonia in Anisometropia and Amblyopia.

PURPOSE: Clinically, aniseikonia (a perceived difference in shape and image size between the eyes) is often neglected in anisometropic amblyopia due to assumed measurement difficulties. Therefore, we currently lack evidence on whether correction of aniseikonia is beneficial. This study aimed to determine whether subjective aniseikonia is measurable in anisometropia with or without amblyopia. METHODS: Participants (15-52 years) with Anisometropic Amblyopia (n = 7), Anisometropia without amblyopia (n = 6) and Isometropic Controls (n = 6) were recruited. Subjective aniseikonia was measured using three clinical techniques: Robertson Technique (RT) (penlight and Maddox rod), Aniseikonia Inspector Version 3 (AI3), and the New Aniseikonia Test booklet (NAT), and a psychophysical adaptive method, the Contrast-balanced Aniseikonia Test (CAT), where dichoptic contrast adjustments compensate for any suppression. RESULTS: Eighteen participants completed all tests, one Anisometropic Amblyopia participant could only complete the CAT and NAT due to fusion loss. The Anisometropic Amblyopia group exhibited the most aniseikonia (range -1.50-+10.50%) followed by Anisometropic Controls (range -3.30-+4.50%) and Isometropic Controls (range -1.50-+3.28%). There was a significant trend of more subjective aniseikonia with increasing amounts of anisometropia across all four tests (AI3 r = 0.630, p = 0.005; NAT r = 0.542, p = 0.017; RT r = 0.499, p = 0.035; CAT r = 0.440, p = 0.059. Bland Altman analysis demonstrated clinically significant levels of variability between the tests. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective aniseikonia can be reliably measured in patients with anisometropia and suppression. Subjective aniseikonia measurement is recommended as four of the most commonly used clinical tests did not support the 1% per dioptre rule of thumb.

Aniseikonia and anisometropia: implications for suppression and amblyopia.

Aniseikonia is a difference in the perceived size or shape of images between eyes, and can arise from a variety of physiological, neurological, retinal, and optical causes. Aniseikonia is associated with anisometropia, as both anisometropia itself and the optical correction for anisometropia can cause aniseikonia. Image size differences above one to three per cent can be clinically symptomatic. Common symptoms include asthenopia, headache and diplopia in vertical gaze. Size differences of three and more impair binocular visual functions such as binocular summation and stereopsis. Above five per cent of aniseikonia, binocular inhibition or suppression tend to occur to prevent diplopia and confusion. Aniseikonia can be measured using a range of techniques and can be corrected or reduced by prescribing contact lenses or specially designed spectacle lenses. Subjective testing of aniseikonia is the only way to accurately measure the overall perceived amount of aniseikonia. However, currently it is not routinely assessed in most clinical settings. At least two-thirds of patients with amblyopia have anisometropia, thus we may expect aniseikonia to be common in patients with anisometropic amblyopia. However, aniseikonia may not be experienced by the patient under normal binocular viewing conditions if the image from the amblyopic eye is of poor quality or is too strongly suppressed for image size differences to be recognised. This lack of binocular simultaneous perception in amblyopia may also prevent the measurement of aniseikonia, as most common techniques require direct comparisons of images seen by each eye. Current guidelines for the treatment of amblyopia advocate full correction of anisometropia to equalise image clarity, but do not address aniseikonia. Significant image size differences between eyes may lead to suppression and abnormal binocular adaptations. It is possible that correcting anisometropia and aniseikonia simultaneously, particularly at the initial diagnosis of anisometropia, would reduce the need to develop suppression and improve treatment outcomes for anisometropic amblyopia.

Optical treatment of amblyopia in older children and adults is essential prior to enrolment in a clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Optical treatment alone can improve visual acuity (VA) in children with amblyopia, thus clinical trials investigating additional amblyopia therapies (such as patching or videogames) for children require a preceding optical treatment phase. Emerging therapies for adult patients are entering clinical trials. It is unknown whether optical treatment is effective for adults with amblyopia and whether an optical correction phase is required for trials involving adults. METHODS: We examined participants who underwent optical treatment in the Binocular Treatment for Amblyopia using Videogames (BRAVO) clinical trial (ANZCTR ID: ACTRN12613001004752). Participants were recruited in three age groups (7 to 12, 13 to 17, or ≥18 years), and had unilateral amblyopia due to anisometropia and/or strabismus, with amblyopic eye VA of 0.30-1.00 logMAR (6/12 to 6/60, 20/40 to 20/200). Corrective lenses were prescribed based on cycloplegic refraction to fully correct any anisometropia. VA was assessed using the electronic visual acuity testing algorithm (e-ETDRS) test and near stereoacuity was assessed using the Randot Preschool Test. Participants were assessed every four weeks up to 16 weeks, until either VA was stable or until amblyopic eye VA improved to better than 0.30 logMAR, rendering the participant ineligible for the trial. RESULTS: Eighty participants (mean age 24.6 years, range 7.6-55.5 years) completed four to 16 weeks of optical treatment. A small but statistically significant mean improvement in amblyopic eye VA of 0.05 logMAR was observed (S.D. 0.08 logMAR; paired t-test p < 0.0001). Twenty-five participants (31%) improved by ≥1 logMAR line and of these, seven (9%) improved by ≥2 logMAR lines. Stereoacuity improved in 15 participants (19%). Visual improvements were not associated with age, presence of strabismus, or prior occlusion treatment. Two adult participants withdrew due to intolerance to anisometropic correction. Sixteen out of 80 participants (20%) achieved better than 0.30 logMAR VA in the amblyopic eye after optical treatment. Nine of these participants attended additional follow-up and four (44%) showed further VA improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements from optical treatment resulted in one-fifth of participants becoming ineligible for the main clinical trial. Studies investigating additional amblyopia therapies must include an appropriate optical treatment only phase and/or parallel treatment group regardless of patient age. Optical treatment of amblyopia in adult patients warrants further investigation.

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.

Importance: Binocular amblyopia treatment using contrast-rebalanced stimuli showed promise in laboratory studies and requires clinical trial investigation in a home-based setting. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a binocular video game with a placebo video game for improving visual functions in older children and adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Binocular Treatment of Amblyopia Using Videogames clinical trial was a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial. Between March 2014 and June 2016, 115 participants 7 years and older with unilateral amblyopia (amblyopic eye visual acuity, 0.30-1.00 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/40-20/200) due to anisometropia, strabismus, or both were recruited. Eligible participants were allocated with equal chance to receive either the active or the placebo video game, with minimization stratified by age group (child, age 7 to 12 years; teenager, age 13 to 17 years; and adult, 18 years and older). Interventions: Falling-blocks video games played at home on an iPod Touch for 1 hour per day for 6 weeks. The active video game had game elements split between eyes with a dichoptic contrast offset (mean [SD] initial fellow eye contrast, 0.23 [0.14]). The placebo video game presented identical images to both eyes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in amblyopic eye visual acuity at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included compliance, stereoacuity, and interocular suppression. Participants and clinicians who measured outcomes were masked to treatment allocation. Results: Of the 115 included participants, 65 (56.5%) were male and 83 (72.2%) were white, and the mean (SD) age at randomization was 21.5 (13.6) years. There were 89 participants (77.4%) who had prior occlusion. The mean (SD) amblyopic eye visual acuity improved 0.06 (0.12) logMAR from baseline in the active group (n = 56) and 0.07 (0.10) logMAR in the placebo group (n = 59). The mean treatment difference between groups, adjusted for baseline visual acuity and age group, was -0.02 logMAR (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.02; P = .25). Compliance with more than 25% of prescribed game play was achieved by 36 participants (64%) in the active group and by 49 (83%) in the placebo group. At 6 weeks, 36 participants (64%) in the active group achieved fellow eye contrast greater than 0.9 in the binocular video game. No group differences were observed for any secondary outcomes. Adverse effects included 3 reports of transient asthenopia. Conclusions and Relevance: The specific home-based binocular falling-blocks video game used in this clinical trial did not improve visual outcomes more than the placebo video game despite increases in fellow eye contrast during game play. More engaging video games with considerations for compliance may improve effectiveness. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12613001004752.

Binocular treatment of amblyopia using videogames (BRAVO): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Amblyopia is a common neurodevelopmental disorder of vision that is characterised by visual impairment in one eye and compromised binocular visual function. Existing evidence-based treatments for children include patching the nonamblyopic eye to encourage use of the amblyopic eye. Currently there are no widely accepted treatments available for adults with amblyopia. The aim of this trial is to assess the efficacy of a new binocular, videogame-based treatment for amblyopia in older children and adults. We hypothesise that binocular treatment will significantly improve amblyopic eye visual acuity relative to placebo treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: The BRAVO study is a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled multicentre trial to assess the effectiveness of a novel videogame-based binocular treatment for amblyopia. One hundred and eight participants aged 7 years or older with anisometropic and/or strabismic amblyopia (defined as ≥0.2 LogMAR interocular visual acuity difference, ≥0.3 LogMAR amblyopic eye visual acuity and no ocular disease) will be recruited via ophthalmologists, optometrists, clinical record searches and public advertisements at five sites in New Zealand, Canada, Hong Kong and Australia. Eligible participants will be randomised by computer in a 1:1 ratio, with stratification by age group: 7-12, 13-17 and 18 years and older. Participants will be randomised to receive 6 weeks of active or placebo home-based binocular treatment. Treatment will be in the form of a modified interactive falling-blocks game, implemented on a 5th generation iPod touch device viewed through red/green anaglyphic glasses. Participants and those assessing outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome is the change in best-corrected distance visual acuity in the amblyopic eye from baseline to 6 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcomes include distance and near visual acuity, stereopsis, interocular suppression, angle of strabismus (where applicable) measured at baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 24 weeks post randomisation. Treatment compliance and acceptability will also be assessed along with quality of life for adult participants. DISCUSSION: The BRAVO study is the first randomised controlled trial of a home-based videogame treatment for older children and adults with amblyopia. The results will indicate whether a binocular approach to amblyopia treatment conducted at home is effective for patients aged 7 years or older. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12613001004752 ) on 10 September 2013.