[Ophthalmist]

Конечно, я о засветах и фиксации.

During my career, 2 promising therapies that were
enthusiastically endorsed and used widely by clinicians did
not prove to be efficacious after careful study: pleoptics and
the CAM visual stimulator (Clemente Clarke International,
Harlow, England). Linksz first suggested that in cases of
amblyopia with eccentric fixation one would encourage
the anatomic fovea to resume fixation superiority if one
dazzled the anatomic fovea with light while shielding the
site of eccentric fixation. Pleoptic therapy was popular and
widely used for 2 decades, but it is rarely used now
because it did not prove to be superior to standard
occlusion therapy.

Окклюзию никто не списывал в утиль, спасибо за поправку.
И видимо Хойт не случайно так написал, изначально под плеоптикой понимались манипуляции с фиксацией:

In the 1940s, Bangerter began systematic active therapy of amblyopia with eccentric fixation using a method for which he coined the term pleoptics
The principle of Bangerter’s method was to dazzle the eccentrically fixating retinal area with bright lights while protecting the fovea with a disk projected onto the fundus, followed by intermittent stimulation of the macula with flashes of light. This treatment is administered under direct observation of the fundus by the therapist, using a modification of the Gullstrand ophthalmoscope (pleoptophor) and is continued until the central scotoma diminishes and fixation becomes central. For use in combination with the dazzling method, Bangerter invented numerous instruments to train deficient oculomanual coordination, separation difficulties, and fusional amplitudes.
A wave of enthusiasm followed introduction of pleoptics, spreading throughout the ophthalmic literature, and numerous reports have attested to its value in treating amblyopia with central and eccentric fixation. However, it soon became apparent that pleoptic treatment should be limited to older and more cooperative children and that considerable time and effort were required before appreciable results were noted. In Europe this led to the establishment of Sehschulen ("vision schools") to which children were admitted (and readmitted) for several weeks or even months of daily therapy sessions. Eventually, studies were published that questioned the long-term effectiveness of pleoptic therapy, its superiority over conventional occlusion treatment, and its practicality from a socioeconomic point of view. The enthusiasm of most ophthalmologists and orthoptists for pleoptics has waned and, fortunately, so has the prevalence of eccentric fixation and deep amblyopia in older children for whom this method was originally designed. It is encouraging that most patients are now referred to the ophthalmologist at an age before eccentric fixation is firmly established and when conventional occlusion treatment alone is effective.

Although the practical importance of pleoptics has faded and, with some exceptions, pleoptics is no longer practiced, the principles of pleoptic treatment should not be forgotten. This method is the only one available for older amblyopic patients who lose their good eye and whose amblyopic eye does not recover vision spontaneously. Bangerter and Cüppers deserve credit for rejuvenating interest in the therapy of amblyopia, for advancing our knowledge of its pathophysiology, and for introducing new diagnostic methods.

По большому счёту, за рубежом, как и у нас (за исключением нескольких энтузиастов, в т.ч. у нас на форумах), основную (и единственную) роль отводят окклюзии. Я глубоко не копал, но те статьи, на которые ссылаются, говоря о неэффективности плеоптики (засветов) в долгосрочном периоде - я бы почитал. Единственное, что т.к. фиксация, по крайней мере у нас, - не определяется - теряются случаи, когда обратная окклюзия могла бы быть частью более успешного лечения.