Efficacy Comparison of Repeated Low-Level Red Light and Low-Dose Atropine for Myopia Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract
Purpose To compare the treatment efficacy between repeated low-level red light (RLRL) therapy and 0.01% atropine eye drops for myopia control. Methods A single-masked, single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted on children 7 to 15 years old with cycloplegic spherical equivalent refraction (SER) ≤ −1.00 diopter (D) and astigmatism ≤ 2.50 D. Participants were randomly assigned to the RLRL group or low-dose atropine (LDA, 0.01% atropine eye drops) group and were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. RLRL treatment was provided by a desktop light therapy device that emits 650-nm red light. The primary outcome was the change in axial length (AL), and the secondary outcome was the change in SER. Results Among 62 eligible children equally randomized to each group (31 in the RLRL group, 31 in the LDA group), 60 children were qualified for analysis. The mean 1-year change in AL was 0.08 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03–0.14) in the RLRL group and 0.33 mm (95% CI, 0.27–0.38) in the LDA group, with a mean difference (MD) of −0.24 mm (95% CI, −0.32 to −0.17; P < 0.001). The 1-year change in SER was −0.03 D (95% CI, −0.01 to −0.08) in the RLRL group and −0.60 D (95% CI, −0.7 to −0.48) in the LDA group (MD = 0.57 D; 95% CI, 0.40–0.73; P < 0.001). The progression of AL < 0.1 mm was 53.2% and 9.7% (P < 0.001) in the RLRL and LDA groups, respectively. For AL ≥ 0.36 mm, progression was 9.7% and 50.0% (P < 0.001) in the RLRL and LDA groups, respectively. Conclusions In…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 62 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.