Eye drops are better for amblyopia than patches, says study
BMJ 2002; 324 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7339.698/c (Published 23 March 2002) Cite this as: BMJ 2002;324:698All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The word 'better' in this title is simply not supported by
the paper that is referred to. At best one could write 'Eye
drops similar in effect to patching in many cases'.
Competing interests: No competing interests
The title of your report misrepresents the results of
the study you report on according to which the results
of treating mild amblyopia with drops or patching are
comparable. At no time have the authors claimed, as
your title indicates, that drops are "better" than patching.
I am shocked to see such careless and misleading
reporting in a respected medical journal. Considering
that many readers just scan titles rather than read
each article in detail it is potentially damaging to
discredit patching which remains the only known
effective method to treat amblyopia of more severe
degrees in children.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Misleading title
I am the protocol chairman of the Amblyopia Treatment Study, the
results which were cited in the article. The report from our study group
in the Archives of Ophthalmology did not conclude any treatment was
superior for the types of amblyopia that we studied, as suggested by the
author of the news report. Rather we concluded that both treatments do
work. There are differences medically and socially in the implementation
of these important treatments. Physicians and parents need to discuss
these aspects of care and then decide which treatment would be best for
their patient/child.
Competing interests: No competing interests