بررسی تاثیر برنامه توانبخشی عملکرد‌های بینایی پایه بر توانایی خواندن کودکان نارساخوان

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 1. کمیته تحقیقات دانشجویی. کارشناس ارشد اپتومتری، دانشکده علوم توانبخشی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی. تهران، ایران

2 2. دکترای تخصصی علوم اعصاب شناختی، استادیار گروه علوم اعصاب شناختی، دانشکده روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

3 3. دکترای تخصصی چشم پزشکی، استاد دانشکده علوم توانبخشی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

4 4. کارشناس ارشد آمار زیستی، مربی دانشکده علوم توانبخشی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

مقدمه
تاکنون نظریات گوناگونی پیرامون علل ایجاد کننده نارساخوانی ارائه شده‌است که در میان آن‌ها اختلالات عملکردهای بینایی از اهمیت چشمگیری برخوردار‌است. بر همین اساس تمرینات توانبخشی متفاوتی برای برطرف کردن مشکلات بینایی مرتبط توصیه شده است. هدف ازاین مطالعه بررسی تاثیر برنامه توانبخشی عملکردهای بینایی پایه بر توانایی خواندن کودکان نارساخوان می‌باشد.
مواد و روش‌ها
در این مطالعه 20 کودک نارساخوان 11-7 سال به صورت تصادفی در دو گروه آزمایش (10نفر) و شاهد (10نفر) قرار داده شدند. گروه آزمایش به مدت 10 جلسه تمرینات توانبخشی بینایی را که شامل تمرینات تقویتی سهولت تطابقی و همچنین نرم افزار برنامه توانبخشی شناختی نجاتی (تمرینات تقویتی کارکردهای بینایی پایه) بود، انجام دادند اما گروه شاهد هیچ گونه تمرینی را دریافت نکردند. عملکرد سهولت تطابق و توانایی خواندن در هر دو گروه قبل و بعد از مداخله به ترتیب توسط آزمون سهولت تطابق و آزمون ارزیابی توانایی خواندن فارسی مورد بررسی قرار گرفت.
یافته‌ها
نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که در گروه آزمایش پس از انجام مداخله، افزایش معناداری در نمرات صحت و درک خواندن و کاهش معناداری در نمره خطای خواندن ایجاد شدهاست (0005/0p≤). در صورتی که در گروه شاهد هیچ گونه بهبودی در موارد ذکر شده ایجاد نشد.
نتیجه گیری
با توجه به نتایج بدست آمده می‌توان گفت که برنامه توانبخشی عملکرد‌های بینایی پایه باعث بهبود در توانایی خواندن کودکان نارساخوان می‌شود. بنابراین در مواردی که نارساخوانی مرتبط با مشکلات دستگاه بینایی است، می‌توان از تمرینات تقویتی عملکردهای بینایی پایه به عنوان یک روش درمانی موثر بهره جست.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of basic visual functions rehabilitation on reading ability of dyslexic children

نویسندگان [English]

  • Tayebe Tahmasbi 1
  • Vahid Nejati 2
  • Mohammad Ghssemi Broumand 3
  • Seyed Mehdi Tabatabaee 4
1 1. Student Research Commeittee.MSc student of Optometry, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2 2. Assisstant Professor, Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
3 3. Professor of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
4 4. MSc in Biostatistics, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Background and Aim: Many theories have discussed the etiology of dyslexia in which defect in visual performance is the current one. Therefore different rehabilitation exercises are recommended for elimination related visual defect. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of visual basic functions on improving reading abilities among students with dyslexia.
Materials and Methods: In this study, A total of twenty dyslexic children, 7-11 years of age, were randomly allocated into an experimental group (n=10) and a control group (n=10). The experimental group performed training of visual rehabilitation through 10 sessions that consisted of accommodation facility (AF) training as well as Nejati cognitive rehabilitation program software (basic visual functions training). Control group, however, did not receive any treatment. AF and reading ability were assessed respectively by AF test and Assessment of Persian Reading Ability Test in 2 groups before and after intervention. 
 
Results: Research findings indicate that after visual rehabilitation intervention, reading accuracy and comprehension scores improved in experimental group, as well as reading error score was reduced in this group (p≤0.0005). Whereas, there was not any improvement in control group.
 
Conclusion: According to the results, it seems that basic visual functions rehabilitation would improve reading ability in dyslexic children.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Dyslexia
  • Basic visual functions
  • Reading ability
  • Cognitive rehabilitation
  1. Glover E, Broning H. Educational psychology: Principles and applications. Kharazi A [Persian translator]. Fourth edition. Tehran: Nobahar Publication, 1996.
  2. Shayan N, Akhavan Tafti M, Ashayeri H. Impact of Davis Dyslexia Correction Mothod on the Adult Dyslexics Reading Skills [in Persian]. Journal of Educational Psychology Studies. Fall 2010-Winter 2011; 7(12):23-46.
  3. Rutter M, Yule W. The concept of specific reading retardation. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1975; 16: 181-197.
  4. Ahmadpanah M, Pachadanaya P. Dyslexia: Review of recent researches [in Persian]. Research on Exceptional Children. 2007; 7(3): 337-352.
  5. Pirzadi H, Ghobari-Bonab B, Shokoohi-Yekta M, Yaryari F, Hasanzadeh S, Sharifi A. The impact of teaching phonemic awareness by means of direct instruction on reading achievement of students with reading disorder [in Persian]. Audiol. 2012; 21(1): 83-93.
  6. Soltani M, Sima Shirazi T, Moradi N. The comparison of visual perceptually skills in normal and dyslexia children in Ahvaz [in Persian]. Research in rehabilitation science 2007; 3(1): 27-32.
  7. Literature Review: An International Perspective on Dyslexia. Ministry of education.
  8. Nicolson R, Fawcett A, Dean P. Developmental dyslexia: the cerebellar deficit hypothesis 2001; 9: 508-511.
  9. Charles W. Thoughts on the research of the reading/vision association. Journal of Behavioral Optometry 2002; 13(6): 153-6.
  10. Ciuffreda KJ. The scientific basis for and efficacy of optometric vision therapy in nonstrabismic accommodative and vergence disorders. Optometry 2002; 73: 735-62.
  11. Facoetti A, Lorusso M, Paganoni P, Umilta C, Mascetti G. T he role of visuospatial attention in developmental dyslexia: evidence from a rehabilitation study. Cognitive Brain Research 2003;15: 154–164.
  12. Grisham D, Powers M, Riles PH. Visual skills of poor readers in high school. Optometry 2007; 78: 542-549.
  13. Leon J. Learning Disorders as a School Health Problem Neurological and Psychiatric Aspects. The Western Journal of Medicine, California medicine 1969; 433-445.
  14. Mazow ML, France TD, Finkelman S, et al. Acute accommodative and convergence insufficiency. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1989; 87: 158-73.
  15. McConkie GW, Rayner K. The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Percept Psychophys 1975; 17: 578-86.
  16. Metsing TI, Ferreira JT. Visual deficiencies in children from mainstream and learning disabled schools in Johannesburg, South Africa. S Afr Optom 2008; 67(4): 176-184.
  17. Palomo-Alvarez C, Puell M. Binocular function in school children with reading difficulties. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010; 248: 885-892.
  18. Quaid P, Simpson T. Association between reading speed, cycloplegic refractive error, and oculomotor function in reading disabled children versus controls. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. doi:10.1007/s00417-012-2135-0.
  19. Ralph P. Garzia and et al. Optometric clinical practice guideline, Care of the patient with learning related vision problems. American Optometric Association, 2000. 243 N. Lindbergh Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63141-7881.
  20. Willows DM. A framework for understanding learning difficulties and disabilities. In: Garzia RP (ed):Vision and Reading. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby 1996; 229-47.
  21. Hammond J, Hercules F. Understanding dyslexia An introduction for dyslexic students in higher education[e-book].  The Glasgow School of Art Cover image:  M. Wood and  F . Hercules.  Available in printed form from, SHEFC National Coordinator and in digital form: www.gsa.ac.uk.
  22. Iles J, Walsh V, Richardson A. Visual search performance in dyslexia. Dyslexia  2000;  6: 163–177.
  23. Stein J. Visual motion sensitivity and reading. Elsevier Ltd, Neuropsychologia  2003; 41: 1785–1793.
  24. American Academy of Ophthalmology, 2009, P.O. Box 7424 / San Francisco, CA 94120 / 415.561.8500.
  25. American Optometric Association, 2006-12. Vision Rehabilitation Section. www.American Optometric Association.mht.
  26. Baezzat F, Banijamali SS, Moazzemi D. Effect of neuoropsychological treatment on the reading efficiency of Iranian students with developmental dyslexia of linguistic type (in Persian). Psychological studies 2006; 2(1): 107-24.
  27. Gallaway M, Boas MB. The impact of vergence and accommodative therapy on reading eye movements and reading speed. Optom Vis Dev 2007; 38(3):115-120.
  28. Bonilla-Warford N, Allison C. A Review of the efficacy of oculomotor vision therapy in improving reading skills. J Optom Vis Dev 2004; 35(2):108–115.
  29. Goss DA, Downing DB, Lowther AH, Horner DG, Blemker M, Donaldson L, Malson T, Gray KH. The effect of hts vision ther apy conducted in a school setting on reading skills in third and fourth grade students. Optom Vis Dev. 2007; 38(1):27-32.
  30. Solan H, Shelley-Tremblay J, Ficarra A, Silverman M, Larson S. Effect of attention therapy on reading comprehension. J Learn Disabil  2003; 36: 556.
  31. Sheiman M, Rousse MW. Optometric management of learning related vision problems. 2006; St.Louis: Mosby.
  32. Same Siahkalroodi L, Alizadeh H,  Kooshesh M. The Impact of Visual Perception Skills Training on Reading Performance in Students with Dyslexia [in persian]. Advances in Cognitive Science 2009; 11(2): 63-72.
  33. Brown B, Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Adams A, Yingling Ch, Galin D, Herron J, Marcus M. Predictive  eye movements  do  not  discriminate between  dyslexic  and  control  children. neuropsychologia 1983; 21(2): 121-128.
  34. Pouretemad H, Jahani M. prevalence of reading disorders in elementary students of Qom (in Persian). 2001, Psychology Group of Qom Payamenoor University.
  35. Griffin JR, Grisham JD. Binocular anomalires, Diagnosis and vision therapy. Fourth edition. New York: Butter worth-Heinemann, 2002; pp 45-9.
  36. Atzmon D, Nemet P, Ishly A. A randomized prospective masked and matched comparative study of orthoptictreatment versus conventionalreading tutoring treatment for reading disabilities in 62 children. Bino Vision Eye Muscle Surg Q 1993; 8: 91-106.
  37. Brodney A, Pozi R, Mallison K, Kehoe P. Vision therapy in a school setting. Journal of Behavioral Optometry 2001; 12: 99-103.
  38. Cohen A, Lowe S, Steele G, Suchoff I, Gottlieb D, Trevorrow D. The efficacy of optometric vision therapy. J Am Optom assoc 1987; 59: 95-105.
  39. Palmo-Alvarez, Puell M. Accommodative function in school children with reading difficulties. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008; 246: 1769–1774.
  40. Scheiman M, Herzberg H, Frantz K, Margolies M.  Normative study of accommodative facility in elementary schoolchildren Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988;  65:127–134.
  41. Bobier W, Sivak J. Orthoptic training of subjects showing slow accommodative responses. Am J Optom Phys Opt 1983; 60: 678-87.
  42. Liu JS, Lee M, Jang J, et al. Objective assessment of accommodative orthoptics.I.dynamic insufficiency. Am J Optom Phys Opt 1979; 56: 285-94.
  43. Fischer  B, Hartnegg  K. Saccade control in dyslexia: development, deficits, training and transfer to reading. Optom  Vis  Dev 2008;39(4):181-190.
  44. Bakker D. Treatment of developmental dyslexia: A review. Pediatric rehabilitation 2006; 9(1): 3–13.