BACKGROUND: The prevalence of visual impairments in people with severe and profound multiple disabilities (SPMD) is the subject of considerable debate and is difficult to assess. METHODS: In a typical Dutch care organization, all clients with SPMD (n = 76) participated in the study and specific instruments adapted to these clients (requiring a minimum of cooperation) were used to measure visual acuity, the visual field, binocular vision, contrast sensitivity, refractive errors and visual functioning behaviour. RESULTS: We found an unexpected 92% of clients with SPMD to have visual impairments. Previously, only 30% were known to have visual problems. None of the persons observed had normal visual acuity. Subnormal visual acuity was the best result. The severity of the visual impairment was related to the severity of the intellectual disability. In addition to the problem of acuity, impairments in the visual field, impaired contrast sensibility and impaired binocular functioning were found, as well as impaired visual attention, fixation and following. In 22% of the clients observed, refractive errors were found and glasses were advised. CONCLUSIONS: Consequences for caregiving and for modifications of the environment were discussed.
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of visual impairments in people with severe and profound multiple disabilities (SPMD) is the subject of considerable debate and is difficult to assess. METHODS: In a typical Dutch care organization, all clients with SPMD (n = 76) participated in the study and specific instruments adapted to these clients (requiring a minimum of cooperation) were used to measure visual acuity, the visual field, binocular vision, contrast sensitivity, refractive errors and visual functioning behaviour. RESULTS: We found an unexpected 92% of clients with SPMD to have visual impairments. Previously, only 30% were known to have visual problems. None of the persons observed had normal visual acuity. Subnormal visual acuity was the best result. The severity of the visual impairment was related to the severity of the intellectual disability. In addition to the problem of acuity, impairments in the visual field, impaired contrast sensibility and impaired binocular functioning were found, as well as impaired visual attention, fixation and following. In 22% of the clients observed, refractive errors were found and glasses were advised. CONCLUSIONS: Consequences for caregiving and for modifications of the environment were discussed.