屈光参差性弱视患者视感知疗法中压抑与遮盖两种辅助治疗方法效果比较

Comparison of the effect of penalization and occlusion in the visual perception therapy in treating patients with anisometropic amblyopia

目的:比较研究屈光参差性弱视患者视感知疗法中压抑与遮盖两种辅助治疗方法的临床效果。方法:选取2014年5月—2015年8月在我院接受治疗的屈光参差性弱视患者100例,根据治疗方式不同分为压抑组(47例,91眼)和遮盖组(53例,101眼),两组患者均采取视觉感知疗法治疗,其中压抑组辅以压抑疗法,遮盖组辅以遮盖疗法。比较两组患者的视力变化情况。结果:治疗后,两组患者的视力均较治疗前明显提高(P<0.05),而压抑组提高幅度更大,与遮盖组差异显著(P<0.05);压抑组和遮盖组的治疗总有效率分别为87.7%和78.2%,两组之间差异显著(P<0.05)。结论:屈光参差性弱视患者采用视感知疗法治疗时辅以压抑疗法的效果明显优于遮盖疗法。

Objective: To compare the effect of penalization and occlusion in the visual perception therapy in treating patients withanisometropic amblyopia. Methods: 100 patients with anisometropic amblyopia admitted and treated in our hospital from May 2014 toAugust 2015,were selected and divided into penalization group (47 cases, 91 eyes) and occlusion group (53 cases, 101 eyes) according todifferent ways of treatment. All patients were given visual perception therapy, the penalization group was combined with penalization whilethe occlusion group was combined with occlusion therapy. The visual acuity of the two groups was compared. Results: After treatment, thevisual acuity of the two groups were significantly improved than before (P<0.05), while that of the penalization group increased moresignificantly. The difference between the penalization group and the occlusion group was significant (P<0.05). The total effective rate ofthe penalization group and theocclusion group was 87.7% and 78.2% respectively, the difference was significant (P<0.05). Conclusion:The effect of visual perception therapy with penalization was superior to occlusion therapy in the treatment of anisometropic amblyopia.