Myopia Profile

Clinical

Which myopia control treatment works best?

Posted on November 17th 2023 by Kate Gifford

In this article:

First published November 11, 2023
Updated December 5, 2025


With an increasing availability of myopia control treatments, and expanding body of research, it can be a challenge for the clinician to understand which treatment to prescribe. The good news is that there are numerous highly effective treatment options, which gives you the opportunity to select what will work best for your patient’s vision, eye health, lifestyle and myopia control goals. 

This article explains how we can compare treatments - from scientific, clinical and patient-communication aspects.


Understanding treatment efficacy

Current evidence suggests that many myopia control treatments achieve comparable efficacy, with no single treatment being clearly superior. However, some treatments are notably less effective than others.1,2

Whether myopia control efficacy is best expressed as an absolute change or a percentage effect also remains debated.2

Before comparing treatment options, it helps to clarify how myopia control efficacy is assessed. 

  1. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard. RCTs are studies which directly compare a treatment group, against an age- and refraction-matched control group receiving no treatment – which typically involves single vision lenses or a placebo eye drop.3
  2. Efficacy applies within a study. Within a single study, how effectively the treatment worked compared to the control is often expressed as a percentage. While valuable for that specific study, these percentages cannot be directly compared to other studies, as different studies have different characteristics that can influence outcomes.1
  3. Axial length is the preferred measure. Compared with refraction, axial length is more sensitive at detecting changes in myopia progression, making it a more precise gauge of treatment efficacy.3 As a result, the axial length efficacy (%) often appears slightly lower than refractive efficacy (%).
Warning

Percentage efficacy values are not comparable between studies, so a 75% result in one study doesn’t automatically mean greater effectiveness than a 50% result elsewhere.

Grouping treatments by similar efficacy

Directly comparing percentage efficacy can create misleading assumptions about which treatment is best. So how can we identify the most effective treatments? 

A clearer approach is to group treatments by effect size – those shown to slow axial elongation by at least 50%, or those by roughly 33%. In practice, broad percentage categories provide a simple way to communicate efficacy with parents and patients.

For example, if three myopia control studies report axial elongation reductions of 75%, 52%, and 66%, compared with their respective control groups, all three would fall into the ‘at least 50%’ category. 

This approach offers some advantages: 

  • Clear for patients and parents. Percentages such as 50% ("slows myopia by about half") and 33% ("slow it by about a third") are intuitive, while also making it clear that no myopia control strategy achieves 100% efficacy.
  • Clear for clinicians. It provides an evidence-based, easy to communicate framework that helps practitioners present multiple treatment options at once.

How to communicate treatment options

Myopia Profile’s Managing Myopia Guidelines infographic uses a simplified format to explain treatment options to parents. These free, multilingual resources are designed to support clinical decision making and communication in practice.

Panel 2 - what are my options.png

Panel 2: ‘What are my options?’ from the Managing Myopia Guidelines infographic.

Panel 2 of the infographic groups similarly effective treatments, according to axial length outcomes from RCTs with at least 12 months of published data. Note that availability may vary by country.

Because current shows that many treatments achieve similar efficacy, with no single option clearly superior, broad efficacy categories are used: at least 50% and around 33%. These make it easy to communicate average expected outcomes and set treatment goals. For example, explaining that a treatment can slow myopia progression by "at least half", or that a treatment slows it by "about a third".

Information

Direct parents to My Kids Vision for a clear explanation on understanding expectations in myopia control, a useful support for treatment discussions.

Which are the ‘best’ treatments?

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 3.54.30 pm.png

The treatments sitting on the ‘best’ podium have been shown to reduce axial length progression by at least 50%. 

These include 0.05% atropine, CooperVision MiSight 1 day, orthokeratology, Hoya MiYOSMART, Essilor Stellest, and  SightGlass Vision DOT.4-9

Other treatments with comparable efficacy that could be considered within this category include the following. Some have yet to be added to our infographic as they have newer research, and some have yet to pass the bar of 12-month RCT data publication. 

All of the ‘best’ treatments appear to have similar efficacy, based on their one-year randomized controlled trial data. These interventions can be described to parents as "slowing progression by at least half".

Which are the 'next best' treatments?

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 4.00.39 pm.png

The treatments sitting on the ‘next best’ podium have been shown to reduce axial length progression by about 33%. 

These include 0.025% atropine, Mark’ennovy MYLO, CooperVision Biofinity Multifocal (centre-distance, +2.50 add), and bifocal or prismatic bifocal lenses.4,14-16

Other treatments with comparable efficacy that could be considered within this category include:

All of the ‘next best’ treatments have been shown to reduce axial length progression by around 33%. These interventions can be described to parents as "slowing progression by about a third".

Which treatments are minimally effective?

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 4.10.18 pm.png

The treatments sitting on the ‘less effective’ podium have been shown to have minimal impact on axial length progression, and are the among the least effective treatments. 

These include 0.01% atropine, Zeiss MyoVision Pro, and progressive addition spectacle lenses.4,18,19

Information

Although 0.01% atropine shows modest efficacy, research is ongoing to identify which children benefit most. Emerging evidence suggests that combining low-dose atropine with treatments like orthokeratology may improve overall myopia control outcomes.

Which option should you prescribe?

Numerous treatment options may be suitable for your patient, since many have similar efficacy. Choose the ideal treatment based on what you have available, and what best suits their ocular, lifestyle and family factors.

A simple approach is to ask yourself the following questions:

  1. What is the most effective treatment that you have available to you? Try to select from the ‘best’ (gold category) treatments where possible.
  2. Glasses or contact lenses? Child with myopia need vision correction, so start with optical treatments that can provide both myopia correction and effective myopia control. 
  3. Which treatment will achieve the best compliance? Compliance is crucial to myopia control success, so treatments should be worn full-time and/or every day. A general guideline is at least 12 hours per day – every day for glasses, and 6 to 7 days per week for contact lenses.5,8
Information

Once treatment has commenced, learn how to use the infographics to gauge success in myopia management.


Meet the Authors:

About Kate Gifford

Dr Kate Gifford is an internationally renowned clinician-scientist optometrist and peer educator, and a Visiting Research Fellow at Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. She holds a PhD in contact lens optics in myopia, four professional fellowships, over 100 peer reviewed and professional publications, and has presented more than 200 conference lectures. Kate is the Chair of the Clinical Management Guidelines Committee of the International Myopia Institute. In 2016 Kate co-founded Myopia Profile with Dr Paul Gifford; the world-leading educational platform on childhood myopia management. After 13 years of clinical practice ownership, Kate now works full time on Myopia Profile.

Back to all articles

Enormous thanks to our visionary sponsors

Myopia Profile’s growth into a world leading platform has been made possible through the support of our visionary sponsors, who share our mission to improve children’s vision care worldwide. Click on their logos to learn about how these companies are innovating and developing resources with us to support you in managing your patients with myopia.