PURPOSE: Both optical and electronic magnification are available to patients with low vision. Electronic video magnifiers are more expensive than optical magnifiers, but they offer additional benefits, including variable magnification and contrast. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of access to a video magnifier (VM) added to standard comprehensive vision rehabilitation (VR). METHODS: In this prospective study, 37 subjects with central field loss were randomized to receive standard VR (VR group, 18 subjects) or standard VR plus VM (VM group, 19 subjects). Subjects read the International Reading Speed Texts (IReST), a bank check, and a phone number at enrollment, at 1 month, and after occupational therapy (OT) as indicated to address patient goals. The Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire, a version of the Activity Inventory (AI), and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) were administered at enrollment, 1 month, after OT, 1 month later, and 1 year after enrollment. Assessments at enrollment and 1 month later were evaluated. RESULTS: At 1 month, the VM group displayed significant improvement in reading continuous print as measured by the IReST (P = 0.01) but did not differ on IVI, AI, or DASS. From enrollment to 1 month all subjects improved in their ability to spot read (phone number and check; P < 0.01 for both). The VM group improved in their ability to find and read a number in a phone book more than the VR group at 1 month after initial consultation (P = 0.02). All reported better well-being (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: All subjects reported better well-being on the IVI. The VM group read faster and was better at two spot reading tasks but did not differ from the VR group in other outcome measures.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Both optical and electronic magnification are available to patients with low vision. Electronic video magnifiers are more expensive than optical magnifiers, but they offer additional benefits, including variable magnification and contrast. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of access to a video magnifier (VM) added to standard comprehensive vision rehabilitation (VR). METHODS: In this prospective study, 37 subjects with central field loss were randomized to receive standard VR (VR group, 18 subjects) or standard VR plus VM (VM group, 19 subjects). Subjects read the International Reading Speed Texts (IReST), a bank check, and a phone number at enrollment, at 1 month, and after occupational therapy (OT) as indicated to address patient goals. The Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire, a version of the Activity Inventory (AI), and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) were administered at enrollment, 1 month, after OT, 1 month later, and 1 year after enrollment. Assessments at enrollment and 1 month later were evaluated. RESULTS: At 1 month, the VM group displayed significant improvement in reading continuous print as measured by the IReST (P = 0.01) but did not differ on IVI, AI, or DASS. From enrollment to 1 month all subjects improved in their ability to spot read (phone number and check; P < 0.01 for both). The VM group improved in their ability to find and read a number in a phone book more than the VR group at 1 month after initial consultation (P = 0.02). All reported better well-being (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: All subjects reported better well-being on the IVI. The VM group read faster and was better at two spot reading tasks but did not differ from the VR group in other outcome measures.
Authors: Mary Lou Jackson; Jennifer Wallis; Kimberly Schoessow; Brian Drohan; Kristina Williams Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Judith Pijnacker; Peter Verstraten; Wim van Damme; Jo Vandermeulen; Bert Steenbergen Journal: Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn Date: 2011-10-12
Authors: Marloes C Burggraaff; Ruth M A van Nispen; Frank P Hoeben; Dirk L Knol; Ger H M B van Rens Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Ecosse L Lamoureux; Julie F Pallant; Konrad Pesudovs; Gwyn Rees; Jennifer B Hassell; Jill E Keeffe Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Robert W Massof; Lohrasb Ahmadian; Lori L Grover; James T Deremeik; Judith E Goldstein; Carol Rainey; Cathy Epstein; G David Barnett Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: M Austin Coker; Carrie E Huisingh; Gerald McGwin; Russell W Read; Mark W Swanson; Laura E Dreer; Dawn K DeCarlo; Lindsay Gregg; Cynthia Owsley Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 7.389
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
Authors: Muhammad Hassan; Adithi D Chakravarthy; Mahadevan Subramaniam; Parvathi Chundi; Mohammad Ali Sadiq; Muhammad Sohail Halim; Rubbia Afridi; Anh N T Tran; Yasir J Sepah; Diana V Do; Quan Dong Nguyen Journal: Ther Adv Ophthalmol Date: 2020-05-18