Table 3.
Primary outcomes from baseline (1 year) – Change in axial length
| Outcome | Comparison | Number of subjects (primary studies) | Measure of effect (95% CI) | Direction of effect | I2 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change in axial length | Undercorrected versus fully corrected spectacles | 94 (1) | MD = 0.05 (− 0.01 to 0.11) | Favours full correction | N/A |
| RGPCLs versus spectacles or SCLs | 415 (2) | MD = − 0.02 (− 0.05 to 0.10) | Favours spectacles/SCLs | 0 | |
| 2% pirenzepine gel versus placebo | 264 (2) | MD = − 0.10 (− 0.18 to − 0.01) | Favours pirenzepine | 0 | |
| Concentric ring bifocal SCLs versus SVSCLs | 264 (3) | MD = − 0.12 (− 0.19 to − 0.06) | Favours concentric ring bifocal SCLs | 66 | |
| 1% atropine versus control | 586 (3) | MD = − 0.36 (− 0.41 to − 0.30) | Favours atropine | 46 | |
| Peripheral add multifocal SCLs versus SVLs - RCTs | 294 (5) | MD = − 0.10 (− 0.14 to − 0.05) | Favours peripheral add multifocal SCLs | 37 | |
| ΟΚ versus SCLs or SVLs | 524 (8) | MD = − 0.19 (− 0.21 to − 0.16) | Favours OK | 0 | |
| PALs versus SVLs | 211 (2) | MD = − 0.08 (− 0.14 to 0.02) | Favours PALs | 65 |
CI confidence interval, MD Mean Difference, N/A not applicable, OK Orthokeratology, PALs progressive addition lenses, RGPCLs rigid gas permeable contact lenses, SCLs soft contact lenses, SVLs single vision lenses, SVSCLs single vision soft contact lenses