Correction to: development of a core outcome set for amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders: a review to identify outcome measures.

.

Development of a core outcome set for amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders: a review to identify outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Core Outcome Sets (COS) are defined as the minimum sets of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all randomised controlled trials to facilitate combination and comparability of research. The aim of this review is to produce an item bank of previously reported outcome measures from published studies in amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders to initiate the development of COS. METHODS: A review was conducted to identify articles reporting outcome measures for amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders. Using systematic methods according to the COMET handbook we searched key electronic bibliographic databases from 1st January 2011 to 27th September 2016 using MESH terms and alternatives indicating the different subtypes of amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders in relation to treatment outcomes and all synonyms. We included Cochrane reviews, other systematic reviews, controlled trials, non-systematic reviews and retrospective studies. Data was extracted to tabulate demographics of included studies, primary and secondary outcomes, methods of measurement and their time points. RESULTS: A total of 142 studies were included; 42 in amblyopia, 33 in strabismus, and 68 in ocular motility disorders (one study overlap between amblyopia and strabismus). We identified ten main outcome measure domains for amblyopia, 14 for strabismus, and ten common "visual or motility" outcome measure domains for ocular motility disorders. Within the domains, we found variable nomenclature being used and diversity in methods and timings of measurements. CONCLUSION: This review highlights discrepancies in outcome measure reporting within published literature for amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility and it generated an item bank of the most commonly used and reported outcome measures for each of the three conditions from recent literature to start the process of COS development. Consensus among all stakeholders including patients and professionals is recommended to establish a useful COS.

Oral propranolol for the treatment of periorbital infantile hemangioma: a preliminary report from oman.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of oral propranolol in the management of periorbital infantile hemangioma in four subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients who presented with periorbital capillary hemangioma with vision-threatening lesions were prospectively enrolled in this study between January 2009 and October 2010. All subjects underwent treatment with 2 mg/kg/day oral propranolol. All subjects underwent ocular, systemic, and radiologic evaluations before treatment and at periodic intervals after starting therapy. Side effects from therapy were also evaluated. RESULTS: Four subjects, between 3 months and 19 months of age, with periorbital hemangioma were enrolled in this study. Two subjects had been previously treated with oral corticosteroids with unsatisfactory response. All subjects had severe ptosis, with the potential for deprivation amblyopia. Three subjects had orbital involvement. After hospital admission, oral propranolol was initiated in all subjects under monitoring by a pediatric cardiologist. Subsequent therapy was performed with periodic out-patient monitoring. All subjects had excellent response to treatment, with regression of periorbital and orbital hemangioma. There were no side effects from therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Oral propranolol for periorbital hemangioma was effective in all the four subjects. Oral propranolol may be appropriate for patients who are nonresponsive to intralesional or systemic steroids. In patients with significant orbital involvement and lesions causing vision-threatening complications, oral propranolol can be the primary therapy.