1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Outcomes of Telerehabilitation Versus In-Office Training With Magnification Devices for Low Vision: A Randomized Controlled Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          An evidence basis is lacking but needed to compare reading ability outcomes after magnification device training remotely via telerehabilitation versus in office.

          Methods

          A multicenter randomized controlled trial at academic centers and vision rehabilitation private practices randomized 61 visually impaired adults to telerehabilitation or in-office training 1 to 4 months after dispensing new portable electronic, hand-held, or stand optical magnifiers. Telerehabilitation included loaner equipment for Zoom videoconferencing with remote control access software. Using a multilevel regression model, changes in Activity Inventory responses using Rasch analysis estimated reading ability in dimensionless log odds units (logits) (0.14-logit change corresponds with ability change expected from a one-line change in visual acuity).

          Results

          Across 47 participants who completed the trial, reading ability with new magnifiers improved significantly by 0.61 logits on average (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36–0.86; P < 0.001) from baseline to 1 month, and by an additional 0.44 logits on average (95% CI, 0.19–0.69; P < 0.001) from 1 to 4months (i.e., after magnifier training), with very similar significant findings for both telerehabilitation ( n = 29; mean improvement = 0.44 logits; 95% CI, 0.08–0.80; P = 0.018) and in-office training ( n = 18; mean improvement = 0.43 logits; 95% CI, 0.15–0.71; P = .003), and no significant difference between randomized groups across both follow-ups (95% CI, −0.43 to 0.61; P = .73). Vision, demographics, and health factors were nonsignificantly related to reading ability changes from 1 to 4 months.

          Conclusions

          Reading ability improved after the provision of newly dispensed magnifiers, with further improvements following additional magnifier training via either telerehabilitation or in-office usual care.

          Translational Relevance

          These findings provide support for the use of telerehabilitation to enhance reading ability with newly prescribed magnifiers as an alternative modality of care delivery.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The hospital anxiety and depression scale.

          A self-assessment scale has been developed and found to be a reliable instrument for detecting states of depression and anxiety in the setting of an hospital medical outpatient clinic. The anxiety and depressive subscales are also valid measures of severity of the emotional disorder. It is suggested that the introduction of the scales into general hospital practice would facilitate the large task of detection and management of emotional disorder in patients under investigation and treatment in medical and surgical departments.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

            A 36-item short-form (SF-36) was constructed to survey health status in the Medical Outcomes Study. The SF-36 was designed for use in clinical practice and research, health policy evaluations, and general population surveys. The SF-36 includes one multi-item scale that assesses eight health concepts: 1) limitations in physical activities because of health problems; 2) limitations in social activities because of physical or emotional problems; 3) limitations in usual role activities because of physical health problems; 4) bodily pain; 5) general mental health (psychological distress and well-being); 6) limitations in usual role activities because of emotional problems; 7) vitality (energy and fatigue); and 8) general health perceptions. The survey was constructed for self-administration by persons 14 years of age and older, and for administration by a trained interviewer in person or by telephone. The history of the development of the SF-36, the origin of specific items, and the logic underlying their selection are summarized. The content and features of the SF-36 are compared with the 20-item Medical Outcomes Study short-form.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Visual Impairment and Blindness in Adults in the United States: Demographic and Geographic Variations From 2015 to 2050.

              The number of individuals with visual impairment (VI) and blindness is increasing in the United States and around the globe as a result of shifting demographics and aging populations. Tracking the number and characteristics of individuals with VI and blindness is especially important given the negative effect of these conditions on physical and mental health.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Transl Vis Sci Technol
                Transl Vis Sci Technol
                TVST
                Translational Vision Science & Technology
                The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
                2164-2591
                12 January 2024
                January 2024
                : 13
                : 1
                : 6
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Ophthalmology, Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA
                [2 ]Mid-Michigan Eye Care, Midland, MI, USA
                [3 ]Marshall B. Ketchum University, Southern California College of Optometry, Fullerton, CA, USA
                [4 ]University of Nebraska Medical Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Truhlsen Eye Institute, Weigel Williamson Center for Visual Rehabilitation, Omaha, NE, USA
                [5 ]Chan Family Optometry, Grass Valley, CA, USA
                [6 ]Frank Stein & Paul S. May Center for Low Vision Rehabilitation, San Francisco, CA, USA
                [7 ]New England College of Optometry, Boston, MA, USA
                Author notes
                [* ] Correspondence: Ava Bittner, UCLA Vision Rehabilitation Center, 200 Stein Plaza Driveway, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. e-mail: abittner@ 123456mednet.ucla.edu
                Article
                TVST-23-6327
                10.1167/tvst.13.1.6
                10790671
                38214688
                85dc8102-8de2-45d8-96f6-012dd502d499
                Copyright 2024 The Authors

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 17 December 2023
                : 18 October 2023
                Page count
                Pages: 13
                Categories
                Clinical Trials
                Clinical Trials

                low vision,vision rehabilitation,magnification,reading
                low vision, vision rehabilitation, magnification, reading

                Comments

                Comment on this article