INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of uncorrected visual disorders in nursing home patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and to determine whether appropriate corrective measures were taken by nursing home staff. This study was conducted at 2 community nursing homes in the St Louis area. Whereas previous studies have shown that visual impairment is common among all residents of nursing facilities, our study was focused specifically on residents with AD. This population is less able to effectively express needs and more likely to endure unaddressed visual deficits. For AD patients, it is important to offer appropriate corrective remedies in order to maintain as much functional independence as possible. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2 private, skilled nursing facilities in St Louis County thought to be representative of community nursing homes in the United States. All subjects were patients with a diagnosis of dementia of probable AD. Demographic information collected included age, sex, and race. Mini-Mental State Examination scores were also obtained. The patients, their families, and nursing staff were interviewed to determine the patients' visual history, corrective measures, and the usage of corrective eyewear before and after admission to the nursing homes. The data were summarized to demonstrate how many patients suffered from uncorrected errors of refraction and what factors contributed to their visual status. RESULTS: Of the total of 85 patients included in the study, 80 (94.1%) required glasses for correction of presbyopia, myopia, or both. However, 25 of the 80 residents had not actively been using glasses since entering the nursing home. Of these 25 residents not wearing proper eyewear, 9 residents were too cognitively impaired to request them, 8 residents had broken or misplaced them, and 8 residents had prescriptions that were no longer sufficient to correct their vision. DISCUSSION: Our study found that nearly one third of the visually impaired nursing home residents with AD (25 of 80 patients) were not using their required eyewear. These 25 patients were the population of most interest because they were most likely to benefit from intervention. Many of these patients were not using glasses because they had been lost, damaged, or were no longer sufficient to correct their vision. CONCLUSIONS: We have presented 3 recommendations intended to prevent uncorrected visual acuity in nursing home residents with dementia: (1) Label eyewear in appropriate patient populations to provide rapid identification in the event of misplacement, (2) recommend that an extra pair of glasses be made available if the current pair would be lost or damaged, and (3) ensure that all residents have annual or biannual eye exams. If adequate steps are taken to prevent unnecessary visual impairment in AD patients, it would limit their dependence on others, reduce the burden on nursing staff, and improve the patients' overall quality of life.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of uncorrected visual disorders in nursing home patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and to determine whether appropriate corrective measures were taken by nursing home staff. This study was conducted at 2 community nursing homes in the St Louis area. Whereas previous studies have shown that visual impairment is common among all residents of nursing facilities, our study was focused specifically on residents with AD. This population is less able to effectively express needs and more likely to endure unaddressed visual deficits. For ADpatients, it is important to offer appropriate corrective remedies in order to maintain as much functional independence as possible. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2 private, skilled nursing facilities in St Louis County thought to be representative of community nursing homes in the United States. All subjects were patients with a diagnosis of dementia of probable AD. Demographic information collected included age, sex, and race. Mini-Mental State Examination scores were also obtained. The patients, their families, and nursing staff were interviewed to determine the patients' visual history, corrective measures, and the usage of corrective eyewear before and after admission to the nursing homes. The data were summarized to demonstrate how many patients suffered from uncorrected errors of refraction and what factors contributed to their visual status. RESULTS: Of the total of 85 patients included in the study, 80 (94.1%) required glasses for correction of presbyopia, myopia, or both. However, 25 of the 80 residents had not actively been using glasses since entering the nursing home. Of these 25 residents not wearing proper eyewear, 9 residents were too cognitively impaired to request them, 8 residents had broken or misplaced them, and 8 residents had prescriptions that were no longer sufficient to correct their vision. DISCUSSION: Our study found that nearly one third of the visually impaired nursing home residents with AD (25 of 80 patients) were not using their required eyewear. These 25 patients were the population of most interest because they were most likely to benefit from intervention. Many of these patients were not using glasses because they had been lost, damaged, or were no longer sufficient to correct their vision. CONCLUSIONS: We have presented 3 recommendations intended to prevent uncorrected visual acuity in nursing home residents with dementia: (1) Label eyewear in appropriate patient populations to provide rapid identification in the event of misplacement, (2) recommend that an extra pair of glasses be made available if the current pair would be lost or damaged, and (3) ensure that all residents have annual or biannual eye exams. If adequate steps are taken to prevent unnecessary visual impairment in ADpatients, it would limit their dependence on others, reduce the burden on nursing staff, and improve the patients' overall quality of life.
Authors: Sheryl Zimmerman; Barbara Resnick; Joseph Ouslander; Cari Levy; Joseph E Gaugler; Philip D Sloane; Vincent Mor Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Sheryl Zimmerman; Barbara Resnick; Joseph Ouslander; Cari Levy; Joseph E Gaugler; Philip D Sloane; Vincent Mor Journal: Geriatr Nurs Date: 2022-02-24 Impact factor: 2.361
Authors: Sheryl Zimmerman; Barbara Resnick; Joseph Ouslander; Cari Levy; Joseph E Gaugler; Philip D Sloane; Vincent Mor Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2022-03 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Suzann Pershing; Mary K Goldstein; Victor W Henderson; M Kate Bundorf; Ying Lu; Moshiur Rahman; Joshua D Stein Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Muhamad Aljeaidi; Claire Keen; J Simon Bell; Tina Cooper; Leonie Robson; Edwin C K Tan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Jyoti Khadka; Julie Ratcliffe; Gillian E Caughey; Steve L Wesselingh; Maria C Inacio Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Gabrielle Frame; Adam Schuller; Matthew A Smith; Samuel D Crish; Christine M Dengler-Crish Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2022 Impact factor: 4.160