Eyedrops Delay Onset of Glaucoma

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A simple regimen of eyedrops could delay or prevent the onset of one of the leading causes of blindness in the U.S. According to a report published in the June issue of the Archives of Ophthalmology, drops that reduce eye pressure slow the development of glaucoma.

The most common form of the disease, so-called primary open-angle glaucoma, is known to affect some 2.2 million Americans ages 40 and over. But it may afflict as many as two million more who haven't been diagnosed. "Glaucoma is often referred to as the 'sneak thief of sight' because it often occurs with no pain or symptoms," says Ronald L. Gross of the Baylor College of Medicine, a co-author of the new study. "Many times patients don't notice a difference in peripheral vision until the problem has progressed. Therefore, it is essential to visit an ophthalmologist to detect the condition early."

Glaucoma is associated with a number of risk factors, high eye pressure being one of the strongest. As a result, doctors have prescribed medications to ease that condition as a way of staving off the disease. Whether such treatments actually have a long-term benefit, however, was unclear. In the new study, which spanned a five-year period, investigators followed 1,636 people between ages 40 and 80 who had elevated eye pressure but not glaucoma. Half were randomly selected to use commercially available, pressure-lowering drops each day. Strikingly, the drops--which reduced eye pressure by around 20 percent--cut the rate of glaucoma occurrence in half: whereas 9.5 percent of the study participants who did not receive drops developed glaucoma, only 4.4 percent of the medicated subjects did.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"I think it is very significant that reducing pressure in the eye by only 20 percent reduced risk by as much as it did," remarks team member Michael A. Kass of Washington University. "A modest drop in pressure makes a big difference." Still, the researchers caution that not all individuals with elevated eye pressure should automatically turn to medication. "Before simply putting a patient on drops, doctors need to consider the patient's general health status, their individual risk factors and their life expectancy, Kass says. "It's important to remember that even in the study group that did not receive treatment, 90 percent of the people did not develop glaucoma." Because some eyedrops can cause side effects and daily treatment can be inconvenient and costly, he notes, certain patients may be better off choosing close observation over medication.

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe