论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨综合疗法治疗弱视及遮盖方式和时间不同对疗效的影响。方法:对患儿120例201只眼,其中男65例,女55例。初诊年龄最小3岁,最大14岁,轻度弱视51只眼,中度弱视138眼。重度弱视12只眼,其中135眼为屈光不正胜弱视进行综合治疗2年。并对135例屈光不正弱视患者给于不同遮盖方法和不同遮盖时间,观察治疗的效果。结果:年龄越小治疗效果越好,年龄之间的差异有显著性意义,P<0.001。轻度弱视较中。重度弱视效果好。弱视程度之间的差异有显著性意义P<0.001。中心注视者优于旁中心注视者。2组之间差异有显著性意义P<0.05。表4可以看出不同的遮盖方式对弱视的治疗效果有明显的影响。现有统计学意义P<0.05。表5可看出,用相同的遮盖方法不同的治疗时间,对弱视的治疗效果有明显影响P<0.05。结论:综合疗法转其他单一疗法要好。完全遮盖效果显著。相同的遮盖方法,每天治疗的次数多疗效显著。
Objective: To investigate the effect of combination therapy on amblyopia and different ways and time of curative effect. Methods: There were 120 eyes of 201 children, including 65 males and 55 females. The youngest 3 years old, up to 14 years old, mild amblyopia 51 eyes, moderate amblyopia 138 eyes. Severe amblyopia 12 eyes, of which 135 were ametropic amblyopia for comprehensive treatment of 2 years. 135 cases of ametropic amblyopia were given different masking methods and different cover time to observe the effect of treatment. Results: The younger the treatment, the better the difference between the ages was significant (P <0.001). Mild amblyopia more. Severe amblyopia effect is good. The difference between the degree of amblyopia was significant (P <0.001). Center gaze is superior to center gaze. The difference between the two groups was significant (P <0.05). Table 4 shows that different ways of masking have a significant effect on the therapeutic effect of amblyopia. The existing statistical significance P <0.05. Table 5 shows that, with the same cover method of different treatment time, the treatment of amblyopia had a significant effect P <0.05. Conclusion: The combination therapy is better than other monotherapy. Completely covered effect is significant. The same cover method, the number of daily treatment more effective.