A Study On The Frequency Of Different Types Of Optical Low Vision Aids Prescribed For Low Vision Patients Examined In The Clinic Of Optometry, Faculty Of Rehabilitation Sciences Shahid Beheshti University Of Medical Sciences, Tehran, 1387

Document Type : Original article

Authors

1 Dept. of Optometry, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences. Shahid beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of Ophthalmology. Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences. Shahid beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran (corresponding author)

3 MSc in Biostatistics, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences. Shahid beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background and Aim: Different diseases can be the cause of low vision. In the case of low vision, visual acuity with conventional optical devices such as glasses and contact lenses is between” 20/70 to 20/200”. To improve the visual performance in these patients, low vision aids are prescribed.The types of prescribed low vision aids vary in different diseases. The purpose of this study is to determine the type and frequency of optical aids prescribed for low vision patients examined in optometry clinic of Rehabilitation faculty of shahid Beheshti University in 1387.              
Materials and Methods: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 204 low vision patients went under investigation. In the present study variables including type and rate of refractive error, visual acuity with the best correction, type of diseases and type of prescribed optical low vision aids were investigated.
Results: The frequency of prescribed distance  glasses in diabetic retinopathy was 97%, age related macular degeneration 86.2%, Stargarts 92%, retinitis pigmentosa 86.4% and albinism 88.2%, Also the frequency of prescribed microscope in diabetic retinopathy was 81.82% , age related macular degeneration 48.27%, Stargarts 40% , retinitis pigmentosa 35.3% , albinism 35.3% and the frequency of prescribed magnifier in diabetic retinopathy was18.18%, age related macular degeneration 24.12% , Stargarts 52%, retinitis pigmentosa18.18% and albinism 29.4%.
Conclusion: In many low vision conditions, it is more suitable to prescribe distance glasses rather than telescope. In this study the distance glass with the frequency of 84.8% is seen more acceptable in comparison with the telescope with the frequency of 41.7%. Among near optical low vision aids, microscope with the frequency of 50.5% is more accepted by the patients compared to magnifier with the frequency of 26% and CCTV with the frequency of 0.50%.

Keywords

References

  1.  

     

    1. Richard LB. Essential of low vision practice. 1st ed. New York: Butterworth Heinemann piblisher; 1999. P 79-105.
    2. Scheiman Mi, Scheiman Ma, Whittaker SG. Low Vision Rehabilitation: A Practical Guid for Occupational Therapists. 1st  ed. New York: Slack Incorporated; 2007. P 55-72. 
    3. Macnaughton J, Doshi S, Harvey W. Eye essentials - low vision assessment. London: Butterworth-Heinemann publisher; 2005. P 22-29.
    4. Jackson AJ,  Wolffsohn JS. 5th ed. Low Vision Manual . Philadelphia: Butterworth Heinemann publisher; 2007.P 12-18.
    5. Faye  EE. Clinical Low Vision. 2nd ed . New York:  Little Brown Company; 1984. P257- 324.
    6. Rosenbloom AA.Morgan MM. Rosenbloom & Morgan's Vision and Aging. 1st ed. New York: Butterworth Henemann  publisher; 2007. P 32-42.
    7. Houd SC. Vision Loss in Older Adults: Nersing Assessement and Care Management. New York: Springer Publisher; 2007.  P 7-11.
    8. Melore GG.Treating Vision Problem in the Older Adult. New York: Mosby company; 1997. P 23- 40. 
    9. Nowakowski RW. Primary Low Vision Care. 1st ed.  NewYork: Appleton & Lange publisher ; 1994. P12.
    10. Grosvenor T. primary care of optometry. 5th ed. St.Louis : Butterworth-Heinemann piblisher; 2007. P 34-43.
    11. Ghassemi- Broumand M, Akhgary M .Guide of Types of low vision Aids (in Persian).1st ed.Tehran:  Heyan publisher; 2007. P12-29.
    12. Prak HJ. Clinical effect of low vision aids. Kornea Journal of Ophthalmology.1999 Jun;13(1):52-56.
    13. Friedman DS,West SK,Munoz B,Park W, et al . Racial Variations in Causes of Vision Loss in Nursing Homes. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004 July ;122(7):1019-1024.
    14. Klaver CCW,Wolf RCW,Vingerling JR,Hofman A, et al . Age-Specific Prevalence and Causes of Blindness and Visual Impairment in an Older Population.Arch Ophthalmol. 1998 May ;116(5):653-658.
    15. Temel A.Low vision aids(evaluation for 185 patients.ophthalmic anf physiological optics.1989;9(3):327-331.
    16. Carvalho KM,Monteiro GBM,Issac CR,Shirman LO,Amaral  MS.causes of low vision and used of optical aids in the eldery. REV. HOSP. CLÍN. FAC. MED. S. PAULO .2004; 59(4):157-160.
    17. Riazi A, Kazemi Moghadam M, Jokar Deris T. Telescopes for the visually impaired.[ in persian]. Scientific Journal of The Eye Bank of I.r. Iran 2003;9(1): 68-65.
    18. Park HJ. Moon NJ.Clinical Analysis of 500 Low Vision Patients. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005; 46(2):345-352.
    19. Gothwal VK, Herse P. Characteristics of a paediatric low vision population ina private eyehospital in India. Ophthalmic and Physiological.2000;20(3):212-219.
The Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Volume 1, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
March and April 2012
Pages 12-21

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 14 July 2011
  • Revise Date: 21 September 2011
  • Accept Date: 30 October 2011
  • First Publish Date: 20 March 2012

Share

How to cite

Statistics