VA LOVIT II: a protocol to compare low vision rehabilitation and basic low vision

被引:13
|
作者
Stelmack, Joan A. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Tang, Xiaoyin C. [1 ]
Reda, Domenic J. [1 ]
Stroupe, Kevin T. [1 ]
Rinne, Stephen [1 ,3 ]
Massof, Robert W. [4 ]
机构
[1] US Dept Vet Affairs, Vet Affairs Edward Hines Jr Hosp, Hines, IL 60141 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Chicago Sch Med, Dept Ophthalmol & Visual Sci, Chicago, IL USA
[3] Illinois Coll Optometry, Chicago, IL USA
[4] Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Inst, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
low vision; low vision rehabilitation; reading rehabilitation; vision rehabilitation; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VISUAL FUNCTIONING QUESTIONNAIRE; INTERVENTION TRIAL LOVIT; VETERANS-AFFAIRS; IMPAIRED VISION; MACULAR DEGENERATION; OLDER-PEOPLE; DEPRESSION; OUTCOMES; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00933.x
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Citation information: Stelmack JA, Tang XC, Reda DJ, Stroupe KT, Rinne S & Massof RW. VA LOVIT II: a protocol to compare low vision rehabilitation and basic low vision. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2012, 32, 461471. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00933.x Abstract Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of low vision rehabilitation (LVR) and basic low vision (LV) in a single masked multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods: Three hundred and thirty patients eligible for US. Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare services with primary eye diagnosis (better-seeing eye) of macular disease and best-corrected distance visual acuity of 0.401.00 logMAR (6/15 to 6/60 or 20/50 to 20/200 Snellen) are being enrolled at seven VA facilities. All participants receive an optometric LV examination; and they are eligible to receive the same LV devices that are provided without charge. In LVR, a LV therapist dispenses devices and provides 2 or 3 (1(1/2) to 2(1/2) h) therapy sessions with assigned homework to teach effective use of remaining vision and LV devices. Contact time with the therapist depends upon the devices prescribed and the patients progress in learning the skills that are taught. In basic LV, devices are dispensed by the optometrist without LV therapy. Contact time for dispensing is one hour or less depending on LV devices prescribed. The primary outcome measure is a comparison of the changes in visual reading ability (estimated from patients difficulty ratings of reading items on the VA LV VFQ-48 questionnaire) between the treatment and control arms from pre-intervention baseline to 4 months (2 months after completion of treatment). Secondary outcome measures are changes in overall visual ability, visual ability domain scores calculated from subsets of items (mobility, visual information processing and visual motor skills), Short Form-36, and Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test scores. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted using VA LV VFQ-48 scores and QALYS computed from EuroQol scores. Results: A total of 137 patients representing 41.5% of the study target of 330 patients were randomised from October 2010 to March 2012. Among those 137 patients, mean age was 80.2 (S.D. +/- 9.9) years at enrollment; 97.1% of the patients were males; 94.2% were white. Mean best corrected VA was 0.65 (S.D. +/- 0.3) logMAR (approximately Snellen 6/27 or 20/90) at baseline. Conclusions: LOVIT II is the first multicentre RCT comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LVR and basic LV for patients with macular diseases and near normal or moderate levels of visual impairment.
引用
收藏
页码:461 / 471
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Outcomes of the Veterans Affairs Low Vision Intervention Trial II (LOVIT II)
    Stelmack, Joan A.
    Tang, X. Charlene
    Wei, Yongliang
    Wilcox, Denise Thomas
    Morand, Timothy
    Brahm, Karen
    Sayers, Scott
    Massof, Robert W.
    JAMA OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 135 (02) : 96 - 104
  • [2] Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Low Vision Rehabilitation in Adults
    Gothwal, Vijaya K.
    Bharani, Seelam
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2015, 56 (12) : 7451 - 7461
  • [3] Assessing the Effectiveness of Low Vision Rehabilitation in Children: An Observational Study
    Gothwal, Vijaya K.
    Sumalini, Rebecca
    Bharani, Seelam
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2015, 56 (05) : 3355 - 3360
  • [4] Quality of life of low-vision patients and outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation
    Stelmack, J
    OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2001, 78 (05) : 335 - 342
  • [5] A Common Approach to Low Vision: Examination and Rehabilitation of the Patient with Low Vision
    Sahli, Esra
    Idil, Aysun
    TURK OFTALMOLOJI DERGISI-TURKISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2019, 49 (02): : 89 - 98
  • [6] BASIC CONCEPTS AND TERMS FOR LOW-VISION REHABILITATION
    COLENBRANDER, A
    FLETCHER, DC
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 1995, 49 (09) : 865 - 869
  • [7] The VA LV VFQ-48 and LV VFQ-20 in low vision rehabilitation
    Stelmack, Joan A.
    Massof, Robert W.
    OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2007, 84 (08) : 705 - 709
  • [8] The Effectiveness of Low-Vision Rehabilitation in 2 Cohorts Derived From the Veterans Affairs Low-Vision Intervention Trial
    Stelmack, Joan A.
    Tang, X. Charlene
    Wei, Yongliang
    Massof, Robert W.
    ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2012, 130 (09) : 1162 - 1168
  • [9] Low Vision Rehabilitation for Adult African Americans in Two Settings
    Draper, Erin M.
    Feng, Rui
    Appel, Sarah D.
    Graboyes, Marcy
    Engle, Erin
    Ciner, Elise B.
    Ellenberg, Jonas H.
    Stambolian, Dwight
    OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2016, 93 (07) : 673 - 682
  • [10] Low Vision Rehabilitation in Older Adults
    Tunay, Zuhal Ozen
    Idil, Aysun
    Petricli, Ikbal Seza
    Ozdemir, Ozdemir
    TURK OFTALMOLOJI DERGISI-TURKISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2016, 46 (03): : 118 - 122