The difference between the influence of physiotherapy and orthokeratology on spherical equivalent and antero-posterior axis growth in children aged 7-16 years
Închide
Articolul precedent
Articolul urmator
147 0
Căutarea după subiecte
similare conform CZU
617.753.2:615.8-036-053.2 (1)
Științe medicale. Medicină (11469)
Fizioterapie. Terapie fizică. Radioterapie. Alte tratamente terapeutice non-medicamentoase (299)
SM ISO690:2012
BÎLBA, Rodica, LACUSTA, Victor, DUMBRĂVEANU, Lilia, CUSHNIR, V., CHIRIAC, Vera, CURCA, Stelian, COŞULA, Cristina, SPOIALA, Errica. The difference between the influence of physiotherapy and orthokeratology on spherical equivalent and antero-posterior axis growth in children aged 7-16 years. In: Myopia Day, 12-13 octombrie 2023, Chişinău. Chişinău: ”ARVA COLOR”, 2023, p. 29. ISBN 978-9975-127-87-5.
EXPORT metadate:
Google Scholar
Crossref
CERIF

DataCite
Dublin Core
Myopia Day 2023
Conferința "Myopia Day"
Chişinău, Moldova, 12-13 octombrie 2023

The difference between the influence of physiotherapy and orthokeratology on spherical equivalent and antero-posterior axis growth in children aged 7-16 years

CZU: 617.753.2:615.8-036-053.2

Pag. 29-29

Bîlba Rodica1, Lacusta Victor1, Dumbrăveanu Lilia1, Cushnir V.1, Chiriac Vera2, Curca Stelian1, Coşula Cristina2, Spoiala Errica1
 
1 ”Nicolae Testemițanu” State University of Medicine and Pharmacy,
2 Medical Center “Oculus prim”, Chișinau
 
 
Disponibil în IBN: 16 februarie 2024


Rezumat

Contemporary myopia progression diagnosis is based on the values of spherical equivalent and antero-posterior axis growth. Physiotherapy and refractive therapy are two methods used to prevent further progression of this eye condition. Aim: to evaluate the difference between the influence of physiotherapy and refractive therapy on spherical equivalent (SE) and antero-posterior axis (APA) growth in children aged 7-16 years during a period of 36 months. Method: Clinical prospective study, that included 80 eyes in children aged 7-16 years with mild or moderate progressive myopia (mean -2,50 ± 2,24 D), 50% of which were treated with physiotherapy, 50% - which applied refractive therapy. Results: In children with mild myopia, after three years of physiotherapy, SE value increased by 1.4 times (from -1.54 ± 0.08 D up to -2.08 ± 0.13 D; p < 0.001). After 3 years of refractive therapy, SE value increased by 1.1 times (from -1.47 ± 0.08 D up to -1.68 ± 0.13 D; p > 0.05). The differences between both groups were statistically reliable (p < 0.001). In children with moderate myopia, after three years of physiotherapy, SE value increased by 1.3 times (from -3.75 ± 0.21 D up to -4.71 ± 0.26 D; p < 0.001) compared to therapy refractive, where SE increased by 1.1 times (from -3.8 ± 0.21 D up to -4.3 ± 0.26 D; p < 0.05). The differences between the data from both groups were statistically reliable (p < 0.001). In children with mild myopia, after three years of physiotherapy treatment, AAP value increased from 24.0 ± 0.08 mm up to 24.24 ± 0.13 mm (p < 0.05) compared with refractive therapy, where the same index increased from 23.92 ± 0.08 mm up to 24.0 ± 0.13 mm (p > 0.05). The differences between groups are statistically reliable (p < 0.01). In children with moderate myopia, after three years of physiotherapy, AAP value increased from 24.7 ± 0.21 mm up to 25.08 ± 0.26 mm (p < 0.05). In patients who applied refractive therapy, AAP value increased from 24.74 ± 0.21 mm up to 25.04 ± 0.26 mm (p > 0.05). The differences between groups are statistically reliable (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Both, physiotherapy and refractive therapy stop the progression of myopia in children aged 7-16 years, but the refractive therapy shows statistically better results in comparison (p < 0.001).