 | William L. Park, OD, FAAO is in private practice in Wichita, KS. He works exclusively with patients referred for low vision evaluation, low vision rehabilitation and neurological vision loss. He is a past Director of Low Vision Services, Lions Research & Rehabilitation Center, Wilmer Eye Institute-Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Park can be reached at William L. Park, OD, LLC, www.parklowvision.com, 610 N. Main, Suite 201, Wichita, KS 67203, (316) 440-1690 or drpark@parklowvision.com. |
Vision
2011-07-01 08:32:00
LVROS - low vision rehabilitation outcome study
Question: I have read about your practice being involved in the Low Vision Rehabilitation Outcome Study (LVROS). Would I be eligible and why should I enroll?
Answer: The patient enrollment and data collection portion with Johns Hopkins University has concluded. The data collection to determine whether the outcome of vision rehabilitation had a significant impact in addressing quality of life issues (QOL) is being analyzed, discussed at international and national conferences and prepared for publication in numerous peer review journals.
Research involving vision and neurological impairment is becoming increasingly important because of the predominance of information exchanged in today’s world, which requires adequate vision to be able to read, perform an occupation, use iPhones or a computer and drive to a destination safely. In addition, this kind of research is significant because of the importance of vision in safe driving, fall prevention, performing activities of daily living and recovery from brain injury while maintaining quality of life issues.
Visual field loss is a common consequence of several conditions and diseases affecting the neurological system, including stroke, traumatic brain injury and cerebral palsy, to name a few. When visual field loss is detected, the patient may be referred to an optometrist or ophthalmologist, depending on local availability – and in rare cases – may be referred to a low vision specialist. Common treatment for visual field loss is the prescription of and training in the use of prisms. Often, however, treatment for visual field loss, due to neurological event, stops here.
While it is well documented that prisms can be effective tools in addressing visual field loss, patients will most likely not be able to take full advantage of their remaining vision or achieve as much independence as they possibly could without treatment beyond prism training.
An alternative approach is to offer or refer to a facility that has the capability of providing a comprehensive treatment plan involving the vision specialist, occupational therapists, orientation and mobility specialists and, potentially, physical therapists. This option presents the challenges of a longer treatment time, increased number of visits to rehabilitation specialists and potential issues of geographic distance and travel. A comparison of these two strategies would provide measureable and quantifiable outcomes to be able to demonstrate which is more beneficial to patients and most effective in the long term.
I have significant appreciation for the impact of research. Research can have a positive effect on patient care, epidemiological study, rehabilitation of neurologically and visually impaired individuals, and has the capability to influence policy and reimbursement for those persons that are affected by visual impairment.
Needless to say, this research becomes even more important with the escalation of baby boomers.
