Carassa 1992.

Methods	Study design: parallel‐group RCT Country: Italy Number randomized: Total: 30 total, 10 who underwent trabeculoplasty Per group: within the trabeculoplasty group, apraclonidine = 5, placebo = 5 Exclusions after randomization: none Number analyzed: Total: 30 total, 10 who underwent trabeculoplasty Per group: within the trabeculoplasty group, apraclonidine = 5, placebo = 5 Unit of analysis (participants vs eyes): participant (1 eye per participant) Losses to follow‐up: none How was missing data handled?: N/A Reported power calculation: no Unusual study design (any issues with study design)?: baseline demographics and other characteristics not reported
Participants	Age: not reported Females: not reported Inclusion criteria: aged ≥ 18 years, scheduled for LTP, iridotomy, or posterior capsulotomy Exclusion criteria: active ocular infection or inflammation, past or present severe ocular disease (except cataract and glaucoma, unstable cardiovascular disease, any abnormality preventing reliable applanation tonometry, pregnancy (actual or potential) or breastfeeding, 1 single seeing eye, treatment systemic clonidine, previous enrollment of the fellow eye in the study Equivalence of baseline characteristics: baseline characteristics not reported
Interventions	Intervention 1: 1 drop apraclonidine 1%, 1 hour prior and 1 drop immediately after 360° ALT surgery Intervention 2: 1 drop placebo, 1 hour prior and 1 drop immediately after 360° ALT surgery Length of follow‐up: Planned: 1 week Actual: only up to 3 hours was reported
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: mean IOP and IOP changes during the postoperative period, maximum IOP increases from baseline, IOP increase of 5 mmHg and 10 mmHg from baseline Secondary outcomes: heart rate, BP Adverse events reported: yes Intervals at which outcomes assessed: baseline; 1, 2, 3 hours
Notes	Trial registration: not reported Funding sources: none reported Disclosures of interest: not reported Study period: not reported Reported subgroup analyses: yes, subgroups were different laser procedures
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double‐masked, and placebo‐controlled trial." States randomization was done but not the method of randomization.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation concealment not reported.
Masking of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Authors reported that the study was double‐masked, but did not say who was masked: participants, surgeons, or outcome assessors.
Masking of outcome assessment (detection bias)	High risk	Masking of outcome assessors not reported; however, apraclonidine can cause conjunctival blanching and eyelid raising, which would have been visible to the person assessing IOP after the procedure.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear whether there were any missing data or how they were handled.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	In the methods, the authors stated that, "Ocular examination, heart rate count and blood pressure measurement were repeated hourly during the first three postoperative hours and again one week post operatively;" however, no data were presented from the 1‐week assessments.
Other bias	High risk	Funding sources not reported, very small sample sizes within the different surgeries do not allow for statistical analyses for each surgery alone; authors stated, "Due to the low numbers of cases in each series, individual statistical analyses for each of the 3 series were considered inappropriate."