Effectiveness of portable electronic and optical magnifiers for near vision activities in low vision: a randomised crossover trial

Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 370-384

  Taylor, John J ^a   Bambrick, Rachel ^b   Brand, Andrew ^c   Bray, Nathan ^c   Dutton, Michelle ^d   Harper, Robert A ^a,b   Hoare, Zoe ^c   Ryan, Barbara ^e   Edwards, Rhiannon T ^c   Waterman, Heather ^e,f   Dickinson, Christine ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b MANCHESTER ROYAL EYE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d Macular Society   (United Kingdom)

^e CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

electronic low vision aids; instrumental activities of daily living; rehabilitation; visual impairment

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; READING; SENSORY AID; SPECTACLES; VERY ELDERLY; VISION, LOW; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUALLY IMPAIRED PERSON; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; EYEGLASSES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; READING; SENSORY AIDS; VISION, LOW; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUALLY IMPAIRED PERSONS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85018883808     PISSN: 02755408     EISSN: 14751313     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/opo.12379     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Watson GR, de l'Aune W, Stelmack J et al. National survey of the impact of low vision device use among veterans. Optom Vis Sci 1997; 74: 249–259.
2. McIlwaine GG, Bell JA & Dutton GN. Low vision aids – is our service cost effective? Eye 1991; 5: 607–611.
3. Charlton M, Jenkins DR, Rhodes C et al. The Welsh Low Vision Service- a summary. Optom Pract 2011; 12: 29–38.
4. Bray N, Brand A, Taylor J, Hoare Z, Dickinson C & Tudor Edwards R. Portable-electronic vision enhancement systems (p-EVES) in comparison to optical magnifiers for near vision activities in visual impairment: economic evaluation alongside a randomised crossover trial. Acta Ophthalmol doi: 10.1111/aos.13255.
5. Reischies FM & Geiselmann B. Age-related cognitive decline and vision impairment affecting the detection of dementia syndrome in old age. Br J Psychiatry 1997; 171: 449–451.
6. Taylor J, Bambrick R, Dutton M et al. The p-EVES study design and methodology: a randomised controlled trial to compare portable electronic vision enhancement systems (p-EVES) to optical magnifiers for near vision activities in visual impairment. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2014; 34: 558–572.
7. Cole RJ. Modifications to the Fletcher Central Field Test for patients with low vision. J Vis Impair Blind 2008; 102: 659.
8. Harper R, Doorduyn K, Reeves B & Slater L. Evaluating the outcomes of low vision rehabilitation. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1999; 19: 3–11.
9. Smith BW, Dalen J, Wiggins K et al. The Brief Resilience Scale: Assessing the Ability to Bounce Back. Int J Behav Med 2008; 15: 194–200.
10. Dickinson CM & Shim M. The influence of manual dexterity on reading speed with a hand-held magnifier. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007; 48: 4368–4374.
11. Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) III (2012) Available at: http://neura.edu.au/sites/neura.edu.au/files/page-downloads/ACE-III%20Administration%20%28UK%29.pdf, accessed 14/04/2014.
12. Taylor J & Dickinson CM. The use of MNRead acuity charts in low vision rehabilitation. European Society for Low Vision Research & Rehabilitation (ESLRR) conference, Oxford, September, 2015.
13. Hahn GA, Penka D, Gehrlich C et al. New standardised tests for assessing reading performance in four European languages. Br J Ophthalmol 2006; 90: 480–484.
14. Trauzettel-Klosinski S, Dietz K & the IReST Study Group. Standardized assessment of reading performance: the new International Reading Speed Texts IReST. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2012; 53: 5452–5461.
15. Taylor J & Dickinson CM. The use of International Reading Speed Texts (IReST) in low vision rehabilitation. European Society for Low Vision Research & Rehabilitation (ESLRR) conference, Oxford, September 2015.
16. Stelmack JA & Massof RW. Using the VA LV VFQ-48 and LV VFQ-20 in Low Vision Rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci 2007; 84: 705–709.
17. Patel PJ, Chen FK, Da Cruz L et al. Test-retest variability of reading performance metrics using MNREAD in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011; 52: 3854–3859.
18. Senn S. Cross-Over Trials in Clinical Research, 2nd edn. Wiley: New York, 2002.
19. Senn SJ. The AB/BA crossover: how to perform the two-stage analysis if you can't be persuaded that you shouldn't. In: Liber Amicorum Roel van Strik (Hansen B & De Ridder M, editors), Erasmus University: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1996; pp. 93–100.
20. Christensen RHB. A Tutorial on fitting Cumulative Link Mixed Models with clmm2 from the ordinal Package. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ordinal/vignettes/clmm2_tutorial.pdf, accessed 20/02/2016.
21. Binns AM, Bunce C, Dickinson C et al. How Effective is Low Vision Service Provision? A Systematic Review. Surv Ophthalmol 2012; 57: 34–65.
22. Virgili G, Acosta R, Grover LL et al. Reading aids for adults with low vision. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (10): CD003303.
23. Crossland MD & Silver JH. Thirty years in an urban low vision clinic: changes in prescribing habits of low vision practitioners. Optom Vis Sci 2005; 82: 617–622.
24. Wolffsohn JS & Peterson RC. A review of current knowledge on Electronic Vision Enhancement Systems for the visually impaired. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2003; 23: 35–42.
25. Culham LE, Chabra A & Rubin GS. Clinical performance of electronic, head-mounted, low vision devices. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2004; 24: 281–290.
26. Nguyen NX, Weismann M & Trauzettel-Klosinski S. Improvement of reading speed after providing of low vision aids in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Acta Ophthalmol 2009; 87: 849–853.
27. Goodrich GL & Kirby J. A comparison of patient performance and preference: optical devices, handheld CCTV (Innovations Magni-Cam) or stand-mounted CCTV (Optelec Clearview or TSI Genie). Optometry 2001; 72: 519–528.
28. Peterson RC, Wolffsohn JS, Rubinstein M et al. Benefits of electronic vision enhancement systems (EVES) for the visually impaired. Am J Ophthalmol 2003; 136: 1129–1135.
29. Schwartz D & Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutic trials. J Chronic Dis 1967; 20: 637–648.
30. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD et al. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 464–475.
31. Patsopoulus NA. A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 2011; 13: 217–224.
32. Burggraaff MC, van Nispen RMA, Hoeben FP et al. Randomized controlled trial on the effects of training in the use of closed-circuit television on reading performance. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2012; 53: 2142–2150.
33. Burggraaff MC, van Nispen RMA, Knol DL et al. Randomized controlled trial on the effects of CCTV training on quality of life, depression, and adaptation to vision loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2012; 53: 3645–3652.
34. Court H, Ryan B, Bunce C & Margrain TH. How effective is the new community-based Welsh low vision service? Br J Ophthalmol 2011; 95: 178–184.