Response: Cycloplegia in refraction: age and cycloplegics

Paul G. Sanfilippo; Byoung Sun Chu; Olivia Bigault; Lisa S. Kearns; Mei Ying Boon; Terri L. Young; Christopher J. Hammond; Alex W. Hewitt; David A. Mackey

doi:10.1111/aos.13082

Response: Cycloplegia in refraction: age and cycloplegics

Paul G. Sanfilippo, Byoung Sun Chu, Olivia Bigault, Lisa S. Kearns, Mei Ying Boon, Terri L. Young, Christopher J. Hammond, Alex W. Hewitt, David A. Mackey

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter

Abstract

Editor,
We appreciate the letter by Galvis et al. (2016) regarding our recent publication investigating age cut‐offs for cycloplegic refraction in teenagers and young adults. Indeed, we recognize that the use of two different cycloplegic agents introduces an inconsistency into our methodology in measuring cycloplegic effect. However, the decision to use tropicamide in older individuals was made after considering both the available evidence and pragmatic factors affecting our study population.

Many of our older subjects graciously gave off their time to participate in the study during work periods, and in these cases, we felt the period of cycloplegic recovery (up to 24 hours) was inordinate. In the authors' previous experience in similar studies, this slow recovery has resulted in high rates of loss to follow‐up. The more desirable pharmacokinetic properties (and safer profile) of tropicamide make this an easier agent to use with the working individual.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	373-373
Number of pages	1
Journal	Acta Ophthalmologica
Volume	94
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.13082
Publication status	Published - 1 Aug 2016
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1111/aos.13082

Cite this

@article{7c58eb6be758441197b763ff1209bde5,

title = "Response: Cycloplegia in refraction: age and cycloplegics",

abstract = "Editor,We appreciate the letter by Galvis et al. (2016) regarding our recent publication investigating age cut‐offs for cycloplegic refraction in teenagers and young adults. Indeed, we recognize that the use of two different cycloplegic agents introduces an inconsistency into our methodology in measuring cycloplegic effect. However, the decision to use tropicamide in older individuals was made after considering both the available evidence and pragmatic factors affecting our study population.Many of our older subjects graciously gave off their time to participate in the study during work periods, and in these cases, we felt the period of cycloplegic recovery (up to 24 hours) was inordinate. In the authors' previous experience in similar studies, this slow recovery has resulted in high rates of loss to follow‐up. The more desirable pharmacokinetic properties (and safer profile) of tropicamide make this an easier agent to use with the working individual.",

author = "Sanfilippo, {Paul G.} and Chu, {Byoung Sun} and Olivia Bigault and Kearns, {Lisa S.} and Boon, {Mei Ying} and Young, {Terri L.} and Hammond, {Christopher J.} and Hewitt, {Alex W.} and Mackey, {David A.}",

year = "2016",

month = aug,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/aos.13082",

language = "English",

volume = "94",

pages = "373--373",

journal = "Acta Ophthalmologica",

issn = "1755-375X",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response

T2 - Cycloplegia in refraction: age and cycloplegics

AU - Sanfilippo, Paul G.

AU - Chu, Byoung Sun

AU - Bigault, Olivia

AU - Kearns, Lisa S.

AU - Boon, Mei Ying

AU - Young, Terri L.

AU - Hammond, Christopher J.

AU - Hewitt, Alex W.

AU - Mackey, David A.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Editor,We appreciate the letter by Galvis et al. (2016) regarding our recent publication investigating age cut‐offs for cycloplegic refraction in teenagers and young adults. Indeed, we recognize that the use of two different cycloplegic agents introduces an inconsistency into our methodology in measuring cycloplegic effect. However, the decision to use tropicamide in older individuals was made after considering both the available evidence and pragmatic factors affecting our study population.Many of our older subjects graciously gave off their time to participate in the study during work periods, and in these cases, we felt the period of cycloplegic recovery (up to 24 hours) was inordinate. In the authors' previous experience in similar studies, this slow recovery has resulted in high rates of loss to follow‐up. The more desirable pharmacokinetic properties (and safer profile) of tropicamide make this an easier agent to use with the working individual.

AB - Editor,We appreciate the letter by Galvis et al. (2016) regarding our recent publication investigating age cut‐offs for cycloplegic refraction in teenagers and young adults. Indeed, we recognize that the use of two different cycloplegic agents introduces an inconsistency into our methodology in measuring cycloplegic effect. However, the decision to use tropicamide in older individuals was made after considering both the available evidence and pragmatic factors affecting our study population.Many of our older subjects graciously gave off their time to participate in the study during work periods, and in these cases, we felt the period of cycloplegic recovery (up to 24 hours) was inordinate. In the authors' previous experience in similar studies, this slow recovery has resulted in high rates of loss to follow‐up. The more desirable pharmacokinetic properties (and safer profile) of tropicamide make this an easier agent to use with the working individual.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978975683&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/aos.13082

DO - 10.1111/aos.13082

M3 - Letter

C2 - 27167468

AN - SCOPUS:84978975683

SN - 1755-375X

VL - 94

SP - 373

EP - 373

JO - Acta Ophthalmologica

JF - Acta Ophthalmologica

IS - 5

ER -

Response: Cycloplegia in refraction: age and cycloplegics

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this