Evaluating the Psychological Impacts of Patching Treatment on Parents in Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia

Saeed Aljohani; Rakan  Al-Mutairi

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2022.11418

Authors

Saeed Aljohani Department of Optometry, College of Applied Medical Science, Qassim University, Buraydah, Qassim, Saudi Arabia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5373-023X
Rakan Al-Mutairi Department of Optometry, College of Applied Medical Science, Qassim University, Buraydah, Qassim, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2022.11418

Keywords:

Amblyopia, Psychological impacts, Patching, Parents

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The previous studies showed that patching treatment for amblyopia in children may have adverse psychological effects on children and families.

AIM: The aim of the study was to investigate the reliability and validity of an Arabic version of the Amblyopia Treatment Index questionnaire and to evaluate the psychosocial impacts of patching treatment on parents of amblyopic children.

METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 239 parents or guardians of amblyopic children who had at least five weeks of patching treatment experience in the past 6 months before enrolment. Eligible parent was either enrolled in the study from Qassim University Medical City eye clinics or referred by optometrists and ophthalmologists from 6 hospitals in Qassim province. Twenty parents were asked to repeat the same questionnaire after 14 days ± 2 days for test-retest reliability.

RESULTS: The findings showed good internal validity and reliability for the Arabic version of the Amblyopia Treatment Index questionnaire among Saudi amblyopic patients. The factor analysis revealed that 16 of 21 items were strongly correlated through the questionnaire’s internal consistency ≥0.5 under three factors. Seven items were strongly correlated with the factor of adverse effects of amblyopia treatment. Similarly, seven items were strongly correlated with the lack of amblyopia treatment adherence, and only two were strongly correlated with the factor of social stigma. Reliability tested by Cronbach’s α coefficient showed good internal reliability and consistency (0.774). Cronbach’s α coefficient for the three factors was 0.734 for adverse effect, 0.644 for lack of treatment adherence, and 0.723 for social stigma. There is no significant association between parents’ education level and the final questionnaire score.

CONCLUSION: The Arabic version of the amblyopia treatment index questionnaire showed high validity and reliability for factors related to patching therapy and was useful for Saudi children. Treatment of amblyopia in the Saudi community is strongly affected by adverse effects, adherence, and social stigma of adhesive patching.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Aldebasi YH. Prevalence of amblyopia in primary school children in Qassim province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2015;22(1):86-91. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-9233.148355 PMid:25624680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-9233.148355

Friedman DS, Repka MX, Katz J, Giordano L, Ibironke J, Hawse P, et al. Prevalence of amblyopia and strabismus in white and African American children aged 6 through 71 months the baltimore pediatric eye disease study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(11):2128- 34.e1-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.04.034 PMid:19762084 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.04.034

Huang D, Chen X, Zhu H, Ding H, Bai J, Chen J, et al. Prevalence of amblyopia and its association with refraction in Chinese preschool children aged 36-48 months. Br J Ophthalmol. 2018;102(6):767-71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-310083 PMid:28848024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-310083

Williams C, Northstone K, Howard M, Harvey I, Harrad RA, Sparrow JM. Prevalence and risk factors for common vision problems in children: Data from the ALSPAC study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92(7):959-64. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2007.134700 PMid:18480306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2007.134700

Webber AL, Wood J. Amblyopia: Prevalence, natural history, functional effects and treatment. Clin Exp Optom. 2005;88(6):365-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2005.tb05102.x PMid:16329744 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2005.tb05102.x

Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine vs. patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(3):268-78. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.120.3.268 PMid:11879129 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.120.3.268

Repka MX, Beck RW, Holmes JM, Birch EE, Chandler DL, Cotter SA, et al. A randomized trial of patching regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(5):603-11. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.5.603 PMid:12742836 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.5.603

Repka MX, Kraker RT, Beck RW, Birch E, Cotter SA, Holmes JM, et al. Treatment of severe amblyopia with weekend atropine: Results from 2 randomized clinical trials. J AAPOS. 2009;13(3):258-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2009.03.002 PMid:19541265 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2009.03.002

Repka MX, Wallace DK, Beck RW, Kraker RT, Birch EE, Cotter SA, et al. Two-year follow-up of a 6-month randomized trial of atropine vs patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(2):149-57. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.123.2.149 PMid:15710809 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.123.2.149

Loudon SE, Fronius M, Looman CW, Awan M, Simonsz B, van der Maas PJ, et al. Predictors and a remedy for noncompliance with amblyopia therapy in children measured with the occlusion dose monitor. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(10):4393-400. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-1428 PMid:17003431 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-1428

Wallace MP, Stewart CE, Moseley MJ, Stephens DA, Fielder AR, Monitored Occlusion Treatment Amblyopia Study (MOTAS) Cooperatives, et al. Compliance with occlusion therapy for childhood amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(9):6158-66. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-11861 PMid:23882695 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-11861

Holmes JM, Beck RW, Kraker RT, Cole SR, Repka MX, Birch EE, et al. Impact of patching and atropine treatment on the child and family in the amblyopia treatment study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(11):1625-32. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.11.1625 PMid:14609923 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.11.1625

Felius J, Chandler DL, Holmes JM, Chu RH, Cole SR, Hill M, et al. Evaluating the burden of amblyopia treatment from the parent and child’s perspective. J AAPOS. 2010;14(5):389-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2010.07.009 PMid:21035063 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2010.07.009

Cole SR, Beck RW, Moke PS, Celano MP, Drews CD, Repka MX, et al. The amblyopia treatment index. J AAPOS. 2001;5(4):250-4. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpa.2001.117097 PMid:11507585 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mpa.2001.117097

Group PEDI. Amblyopia Treatment Index: Jaeb Center for Health Research; 2001 Available from: https://www.public.jaeb. org/pedig/view/reference [Last accessed on 2023 Feb 01].

O’Rourke N, Hatcher L. A Step-by-step Approach to Using SAS System for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. North Carolina: SAS Institute; 2013.

Xu J, Lu Q, Huang Y, Chen Y, Chen J, Yu X. Development and evaluation of a patching treatment questionnaire for Chinese amblyopic children. Chin Med J (Engl). 2014;127(7):1261-5. PMid:24709177

Holmes JM, Strauber S, Quinn GE, Cole SR, Felius J, Kulp M, et al. Further validation of the amblyopia treatment index parental questionnaire. J AAPOS. 2008;12(6):581-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2008.04.017 PMid:18976946 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2008.04.017

Aljohani S, Aldakhil S, Alrasheed SH, Tan QQ, Alshammeri S. The clinical characteristics of amblyopia in children under 17 years of age in Qassim region, Saudi Arabia. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:2677-84. https://doi.org/10.2147/opth.S379550 PMid:36003073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S379550