G P Soong1, J E Lovie-Kitchin, B Brown. 1. Centre for Eye Research, School of Optometry, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. g.soong@auckland.ac.nz
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies that have attempted to determine the effect of orientation and mobility training on mobility performance of visually impaired adults have had a number of limitations. With the inclusion of a control group of subjects, this study investigated the effect of orientation and mobility training on mobility performance of a group of visually impaired adults. METHODS: Vision was measured binocularly as high- and low-contrast visual acuity, letter and edge contrast sensitivity, and Humphrey kinetic visual fields. The subjects' mobility performance was assessed as percentage preferred walking speed (PPWS) and error score before and after mobility training. RESULTS: Orientation and mobility training did not enhance mobility performance compared with the control group, who did not receive training, when performance was measured immediately after training. PPWS improved for both groups with short-term practice only, but there was no improvement in error score due to either practice or training. CONCLUSIONS: There was no immediate improvement in mobility performance of visually impaired adults after orientation and mobility training. Familiarity with the route may play an important role in measured improvement of mobility performance after orientation and mobility training.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies that have attempted to determine the effect of orientation and mobility training on mobility performance of visually impaired adults have had a number of limitations. With the inclusion of a control group of subjects, this study investigated the effect of orientation and mobility training on mobility performance of a group of visually impaired adults. METHODS: Vision was measured binocularly as high- and low-contrast visual acuity, letter and edge contrast sensitivity, and Humphrey kinetic visual fields. The subjects' mobility performance was assessed as percentage preferred walking speed (PPWS) and error score before and after mobility training. RESULTS: Orientation and mobility training did not enhance mobility performance compared with the control group, who did not receive training, when performance was measured immediately after training. PPWS improved for both groups with short-term practice only, but there was no improvement in error score due to either practice or training. CONCLUSIONS: There was no immediate improvement in mobility performance of visually impaired adults after orientation and mobility training. Familiarity with the route may play an important role in measured improvement of mobility performance after orientation and mobility training.
Authors: Daniel C Chung; Sarah McCague; Zi-Fan Yu; Satha Thill; Julie DiStefano-Pappas; Jean Bennett; Dominique Cross; Kathleen Marshall; Jennifer Wellman; Katherine A High Journal: Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: Judith Ballemans; G A Rixt Zijlstra; Ger H M B van Rens; Jan S A G Schouten; Gertrudis I J M Kempen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2012-06-08 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: G A R Zijlstra; G H M B van Rens; E J A Scherder; D M Brouwer; J van der Velde; P F J Verstraten; G I J M Kempen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2009-08-27 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Mônica S V Tomomitsu; Angelica Castilho Alonso; Eurica Morimoto; Tatiana G Bobbio; Julia M D Greve Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 2.365