Literature DB >> 22965592

The effectiveness of low-vision rehabilitation in 2 cohorts derived from the veterans affairs Low-Vision Intervention Trial.

Joan A Stelmack1, X Charlene Tang, Yongliang Wei, Robert W Massof.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of low-vision rehabilitation in 2 cohorts derived from the Veterans Affairs Low-Vision Intervention Trial.
METHODS: In a prospective study, we observed 44 participants randomly assigned to outpatient low-vision rehabilitation who did not receive additional treatment after the trial ended at 4-month follow-up and 56 participants randomly assigned to the waiting-list control group and thereafter to standard therapy. The outcome measures included visual ability domains (reading, mobility, visual information processing, and visual motor skills) and overall visual ability estimated from difficulty ratings using the 48-item Veterans Affairs Low-Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Mean visual ability scores for the treatment and control groups were compared at baseline, 4 months, and 1 year. A mixed-effects model was used to test treatment effects between groups over time. Differences in visual ability mean scores from baseline to 1 year were compared between the 2 groups. Within-group changes in visual ability were compared from baseline to 1 year, from baseline to 4 months, and from 4 months to 1 year.
RESULTS: At baseline, there were no significant differences in mean visual ability scores between groups. From baseline to 4 months, the treatment effects for all visual ability domains and overall visual ability increased to a maximum in the treatment group (P< .001), whereas the mean scores (except visual motor skills) decreased in the control group (P< .01). From 4 months to 1 year, the differences became smaller. There was a loss of visual ability in reading and visual information processing (but not in visual motor skills, mobility, or overall visual ability) in the treatment group and a gain in all visual ability measures in the control group. Interactions of treatment and follow-up time in the mixed models showed the trend of treatment effects significantly changed over time from baseline to 1 year (P< .001) for all visual ability domains and overall visual ability. Both groups demonstrated improvement in visual ability from baseline to 1 year (P< .001) (except for mobility in the control group). Overall visual ability (but not other visual ability domains) improved more in the treatment group than in the control group (P= .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Visual ability improved significantly in both groups from baseline to 1 year. The Low-Vision Intervention Trial treatment effect is robust and well maintained for patients with macular diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22965592     DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.1820

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0003-9950


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of LogMAR Eye charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye chart.

Authors:  Marie Miwa; Masaki Iwanami; Mari S Oba; Nobuhisa Mizuki; Tomomi Nishida
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-22       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Occupational Therapy Interventions to Improve Reading Performance of Older Adults With Low Vision: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Stacy Smallfield; Jennifer Kaldenberg
Journal:  Am J Occup Ther       Date:  2020 Jan/Feb

3.  Interventions Within the Scope of Occupational Therapy Practice to Improve Performance of Daily Activities for Older Adults With Low Vision: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Chiung-Ju Liu; Megan C Chang
Journal:  Am J Occup Ther       Date:  2020 Jan/Feb

4.  Low vision rehabilitation in improving the quality of life for patients with impaired vision: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 52 randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Jianhua Liu; Jige Dong; Yaping Chen; Weidong Zhang; Shuai Tong; Jiangzhou Guo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 1.889

5.  Low vision rehabilitation for better quality of life in visually impaired adults.

Authors:  Ruth Ma van Nispen; Gianni Virgili; Mirke Hoeben; Maaike Langelaan; Jeroen Klevering; Jan Ee Keunen; Ger Hmb van Rens
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-01-27

6.  Optimizing the ULV-VFQ for Clinical Use Through Item Set Reduction: Psychometric Properties and Trade-Offs.

Authors:  Gislin Dagnelie; Pamela E Jeter; Olukemi Adeyemo
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 3.283

7.  Rate of Parental Consanguineous Marriage among Patients with Visual Impairments in Turkey.

Authors:  Sezen Akkaya
Journal:  Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol       Date:  2016

8.  Functional Outcomes of the Low Vision Depression Prevention Trial in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Ashley D Deemer; Robert W Massof; Barry W Rovner; Robin J Casten; Catherine V Piersol
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.799

Review 9.  Low vision rehabilitation: An update.

Authors:  Mark E Wilkinson; Khadija S Shahid
Journal:  Saudi J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-10-27

10.  What explains health in persons with visual impairment?

Authors:  Juliane Leissner; Michaela Coenen; Stephan Froehlich; Danny Loyola; Alarcos Cieza
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-05-03       Impact factor: 3.186

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.