%0 Journal Article
%A Guemes-Villahoz Noemi
%A Talavero González Paula
%A Porras-Ángel Paloma
%A Bella Gala, Rafael
%A Ruiz Pomeda, Alicia
%A Martín García, Beatriz
%A Hernández García, Elena
%A GÓMEZ DE LIAÑO SALGADO, CARMEN NUNILA
%A Shah Rakhee
%A García Feijoo, Julián
%A Gómez De Liaño Sánchez, María Rosario
%T Atropine and Spectacle lens Combination Treatment (ASPECT): 12-month results of a randomised controlled trial for myopia control using a combination of Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments (DIMS) lenses and 0.025% atropine
%D 2025
%@ 0007-1161
%U https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/132480
%X Aim: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of combination treatment using 0.025% atropine and Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments (DIMS) spectacle lenses to 0.025% atropine and single vision (SV) spectacle lenses in slowing myopia progression in children with myopia.Methods: Randomised controlled trial conducted on children aged 4-16 years with myopia between -1.00D and -6.00D and astigmatism ≤2.00D. Children were randomly allocated into two groups: 0.025% atropine and SV spectacle lenses treatment group (group A), and 0.025% atropine and DIMS spectacle lenses treatment group (group B). Cycloplegic spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and axial length were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months.Results: 102 patients completed the 12-month follow-up: n=49 in group A, mean age 9.50±2.78 years and n=53 in group B, mean age 9.90±2.47 years. At 12 months, the mean AL±SD change was 0.18±0.16 mm in group A and 0.07±0.16 mm in group B (mean difference: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.17; p≤0.001). Mean SER±SD progression at 12 months was -0.19±0.42D and -0.09±0.35D in groups A and B, respectively (p=0.13). 39.6% of children in group B had no axial elongation over 12 months compared with 12.2% of the children in group A (p=0.002).Conclusions: Combination treatment with 0.025% atropine and DIMS spectacle lenses is more effective in controlling axial elongation than 0.025% atropine with SV lenses. Although not significant, SER differences between groups were lower in group B. These findings support a potential additive effect of the two treatments.
%~