Objectives: The objectives of this study were to report the hospital-based incidence and a rare case series of Marcus Gunn jaw-winking phenomenon (MGJWP) in patients with congenital ptosis Material and Methods: This was a retrospective non-interventional case series. The medical records of all patients diagnosed with MGJWP over the past 3.5 years were retrieved from the electronic medical record. Patients with documented evidence of the presence of ptosis with MGJWP were included and analyzed for visual acuity, the presence of squint and amblyopia, and the presence of other aberrant regenerations. Results: A total of 198 patients were diagnosed with congenital ptosis, out of which 23 (11.6%) patients had MGJWP along with congenital ptosis and 175 (84.4%) patients have congenital ptosis without MGJWP. There were 12 males and 11 females. The mean age at presentation was 10.35 ± 8.4 years (range from 2 to 28 years). All the patients presented unilateral MGJWP. The right eye was involved in seven patients (30.4%) and the left eye in 16 patients (69.5%). Most of the patients had observed the onset of MGJWP by parents since birth. Visual acuity was measured by Snellen’s distance acuity chart in 15 patients. Eight patients were preverbal, and their vision was assessed by the fixation pattern, which was central, steady, and maintained. Nine patients (39.1%) were emmetropic, seven patients (30.4%) had astigmatism, and seven patients were amblyopic in the affected eye. Strabismus was noted in nine patients (39.1%) in this study. Monocular elevation deficiency was noted in five patients, three patients have exotropia, and one had hypotropia. Conclusion: All the patients had a mild form of MGJWP with no intervention required in any of the cases. The hospital-based incidence of MGJWP in congenital ptosis is 11.6%. Most of the patients had observed the onset of MGJWP by their parents since birth.

No abstract

Purpose: To see the reading speed with different low vision devices having same magnification i.e. 2X in emmetropic subjects Objective: To rule out any kind of device this may be of help in future for low vision patients via emmetropic subjects. Material & Methods: The prospective study consists 200 emmetropic subjects of age ranging from 15 to 35 years. The all subject has been asked to read Hindi newspaper of same fonts under same room illumination, magnification and under a constant time period of 1 minute with 5 low vision devices (LVD). The LVD uses were 2x bar magnifier, 2x dome magnifier (55M), 2x dome magnifier (65M), 2x spectacle magnifier and 2x pocket magnifier. Results: Among 200 emmetropic subjects, 126 were males and 74 were female. The mean age of 200 subjects was 22.91 ± 3.92 years. The mean number of letters read with 2x Bar Magnifier was 442.13 ± 165.316, 2x Dome Magnifier (55M) was 440.4 ± 173.352, 2x Spectacle Magnifier was 484.21 ± 486.316, 2x Pocket Magnifier was 443.63 ± 170.374, 2x Dome Magnifier (65M) was 450.98 ± 259.690 in one minute. When one device was compared with other four devices it was found that none of the device showed statistically significance. Conclusion: None of the device was found to be statistically significant, so equally all the magnifiers can be useful and can be used as a startup for low vision patients.

No abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the hospital-based prevalence and major causes of visual impairment in patients attending the low-vision clinic of a tertiary eye institute. Materials and Methods: This study was a retrospective non-intervention hospital-based study. Clinical records of visually impaired patients presented to the department of low vision from February 2017 to December 2021 were retrieved. Blindness has been defined as the best-corrected distance visual acuity of <3/60 and/or <10° visual field in the better eye. Low vision was defined as a best-corrected distance visual acuity of <6/18 but equal to or better than 3/60 in the better eye. The presenting visual acuity, causes of low vision and blindness, and prescribed low-vision devices were recorded and analyzed to determine the prevalence and major causes of visual impairment. Results: Among 414 visually impaired patients, the prevalence of low vision and blindness was 52.9% (n = 219) and 47.1% (n = 195), respectively. Retinitis pigmentosa (n = 57, 13.8%) and glaucoma (n = 43, 10.4%) were the major causes of low vision; however, glaucoma (n = 55, 13.3%) and cortical visual impairment (CVI) (n = 37, 8.9%) were the major causes of blindness. A total of 229 low-vision devices were dispensed, of them 166 (40.1%) were distance and 63 (15.1%) were near devices. Conclusion: The hospital-based prevalence of low-vision patients was more as compared to blindness. The major causes of visual impairment were retinitis pigmentosa, glaucoma, and CVI. A comprehensive approach to the causes of low vision and low-vision services is needed to reduce the burden of visual impairment in the country.