Comparative randomised active drug controlled clinical trial of a herbal eye drop in computer vision syndrome.

A comparative double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial of a herbal eye drop (itone) was conducted to find out its efficacy and safety in 120 patients with computer vision syndrome. Patients using computers for more than 3 hours continuously per day having symptoms of watering, redness, asthenia, irritation, foreign body sensation and signs of conjunctival hyperaemia, corneal filaments and mucus were studied. One hundred and twenty patients were randomly given either placebo, tears substitute (tears plus) or itone in identical vials with specific code number and were instructed to put one drop four times daily for 6 weeks. Subjective and objective assessments were done at bi-weekly intervals. In computer vision syndrome both subjective and objective improvements were noticed with itone drops. Itone drop was found significantly better than placebo (p<0.01) and almost identical results were observed with tears plus (difference was not statistically significant). Itone is considered to be a useful drug in computer vision syndrome.

Comparative evaluation of Teller and Cardiff acuity tests in normals and unilateral amblyopes in under-two-year-olds.

PURPOSE: To compare and evaluate Teller Acuity Cards (TAC) and Cardiff Acuity Cards (CAC) to assess vision in children below the age of two. METHODS: The study evaluated TAC and CAC to assess visual acuity in 90 normal children divided into three age groups, 0-6 months (group I), 6-12 months (group II) and 12-24 months (group III). 30 cases of unilateral amblyopiogenic conditions, 10 cases each of unilateral refractive error, unilateral esotropia, and unilateral cataract, were also examined. Trained optometrists carried out binocular testing followed by monocular testing, and recorded the test time in each case. RESULTS: The mean visual acuity (in Snellen units) and standard deviation (in octaves) in the three age groups of normal children, I, II, III respectively were 6/44 +/- 0.54, 6/21 +/- 0.37 and 6/21 +/- 0.41 (binocularly by TAC) and 6/46 +/- 0.80, 6/21 +/- 0.59 and 6/14.5 +/- 0.84 (binocularly by CAC). Although the time taken for testing with CAC was less, its coefficient of variance was greater for all age groups as compared to TAC. Diminution of visual acuity could be assessed correctly by both the tests in cases of strabismus and cataract, but not in some cases of refractive error. CONCLUSION: CAC is a useful and child-friendly test. It can be used clinically but may miss some cases of visually significant refractive errors. TAC is a more dependable test to assess amblyopiogenic conditions despite the use of gratings.