The efficacy of low vision device training in a hospital-based low vision clinic

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 95, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 105-108

  Pearce, Elizabeth ^a   Crossland, Michael D ^a,b   Rubin, Gary S ^b,c  

^a MOORFIELDS EYE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MASS OF ACTIVITY INVENTORY QUESTIONNAIRE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RASCH SCORE; SCORING SYSTEM; TRAINING; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL DISORDER;

AGED; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISION, LOW; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUALLY IMPAIRED PERSONS;

EID: 78650824015     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: 14682079     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2009.175703     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Congdon N, O'Colmain B, Klaver CC, et al. Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:477-85. (Pubitemid 38456282)
2. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, et al. Quality of life associated with visual loss: a time tradeoff utility analysis comparison with medical health states. Ophthalmology 2003;110:1076-81.
3. Hazel CA, Latham Petre K, Armstrong RA, et al. Visual function and subjective quality of life compared in subjects with acquired macular disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:1309-15.
4. Haymes SA, Johnston AW, Heyes AD. Relationship between vision impairment and ability to perform activities of daily living. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2002;22:79-91.
5. Ramrattan RS, Wolfs RC, Panda-Jonas S, et al. Prevalence and causes of visual field loss in the elderly and associations with impairment in daily functioning: the Rotterdam Study. Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119:1788-94.
6. Szlyk JP, Fishman GA, Grover S, et al. Difficulty in performing everyday activities in patients with juvenile macular dystrophies: comparison with patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Br J Ophthalmol 1998;82:1372-6. (Pubitemid 28556520)
7. West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, et al. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:774-80.
8. Williams RA, Brody BL, Thomas RG, et al. The psychosocial impact of macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 1998;116:514-20.
9. McClure ME, Hart PM, Jackson AJ, et al. Macular degeneration: do conventional measurements of impaired visual function equate with visual disability? Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84:244-50.
10. Stelmack J. Quality of life of low-vision patients and outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci 2001;78:335-42.
11. Haymes SA, Johnston AW, Heyes AD. Preliminary investigation of the responsiveness of the Melbourne Low Vision ADL index to low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci 2001;78:373-80.
12. Low Vision Services Consensus Group. Recommendations for future service delivery in the UK. London: RNIB, 1999.
13. Ryan B, McCloughan L. Our better vision: what people need from low vision services in the UK. 1999.
14. Gieser DK, Williams TR, O'Connell W, et al. Costs and utilization of end-stage glaucoma patients receiving visual rehabilitation care: a US multi-site retrospective study. Int Congr Ser 2005;1282:387-92.
15. Crossland MD, Silver J. Thirty years in an urban low vision clinic: changes in prescribing habits of low vision practitioners. Optom Vis Sci 2005;82:617-22.
16. Ryan B, Culham LE. Fragmented vision - Survey of low vision services in the UK. 1999.
17. Russell W, Harper R, Reeves B, et al. Randomised controlled trial of an integrated versus an optometric low vision rehabilitation service for patients with age-related macular degeneration: study design and methodology. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2001;21:36-44.
18. Reeves BC, Harper RA, Russell WB. Enhanced low vision rehabilitation for people with age related macular degeneration: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1443-9.
19. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, et al. Visual disability variables. I: the importance and difficulty of activity goals for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:946-53.
20. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, et al. Visual disability variables. II: the difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:954-67.
21. Dupont WD, Plummer WD Jr. Power and sample size calculations. A review and computer program. Control Clin Trials 1990;11:116-28.
22. Stelmack JA, Moran D, Dean D, et al. Short- and long-term effects of an intensive inpatient vision rehabilitation program. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:691-5. (Pubitemid 46802410)
23. Stelmack JA, Tang XC, Reda DJ, et al. Outcomes of the veterans affairs low vision intervention trial (LOVIT). Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:608-17.
24. Scott IU, Smiddy WE, Schiffman J, et al. Quality of life of low-vision patients and the impact of low-vision services. Am J Ophthalmol 1999;128:54-62.
25. van Rens GH, Chmielowski RJ, Lemmens WA. Results obtained with low vision aids. A retrospective study. Doc Ophthalmol 1991;78:205-10.
26. Leat SJ, Rumney NJ. The experience of a university-based low vision clinic. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1990;10:8-15.