Benefit of an electronic head‐mounted low vision aid

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of electronic head‐mounted low vision aid (e‐LVA) SightPlus (GiveVision, UK, givevision.net) and to determine which people with low vision would see themselves likely using an e‐LVA like this. Methods Sixty participants with low vision aged 18 to 93 used SightPlus during an in‐clinic study session based on a mixed methods design. Visual acuity (ETDRS), contrast sensitivity (Pelli‐Robson) and reading performance (MNREAD) were measured binocularly at baseline (no device), with the device in ‘normal’ mode (zoom only), and with preferred enhanced mode (zoom and one of four digital image enhancements). At the end of the session, a short questionnaire recorded willingness to use an e‐LVA like SightPlus, potential use cases, positive/negative comments and adverse effects. Results Binocular distance visual acuity improved significantly by 0.63 logMAR on average (p < 0.0001) to 0.20 logMAR. Contrast sensitivity improved significantly by 0.22 log units (p < 0.0001) to 1.21 log units with zoom only and by 0.40 log units to 1.37 log units with zoom and preferred image enhancement. Reading performance improved significantly for near visual acuity and critical print size (p < 0.015), although reading speed significantly decreased (p < 0.0001). Nearly half (47%) of the participants indicated they would use an e‐LVA like SightPlus, especially for television, reading and entertainment (e.g. theatre). Multivariate logistic regression showed that proportion of lifetime affected by sight loss, baseline contrast sensitivity and use of electronic LVAs explained 41% of the variation in willingness to use. Conclusions SightPlus improves visual function in people with low vision and would be used in its current form by one half of the people who tried it. Adverse effects were infrequent and resolved when the device was removed. Future work should focus on comparing e‐LVAs through repeatable real‐world tasks and impact on quality of life.

Clinical performance of a smartphone-based low vision aid

“…Recent advances in technology have led to the availability of smaller, lighter, and more versatile electronic head-mounted LVA 12 , 13 . However, to date, only one study has reported the clinical benefit of a smartphone-based head-mounted LVA in clinical settings (SightPlus®) 14 . SightPlus included five pre-set image enhancement modes, and the study found improvements in distant and near visual acuities and contrast sensitivity in 60 patients with visual impairment 14 .…”

Everyday visual demands of people with low vision: A mixed methods real-life recording study

“…Globally, approximately 216 million people live with moderate to severe visual impairment ( Bourne, Flaxman, Braithwaite, Cicinelli, Das, Jonas, et al, 2017 ), with these numbers predicted to rise over coming decades due to an aging population ( Access Economics Pty Ltd, 2009 ; Pezzullo, Streatfeild, Simkiss, & Shickle, 2018 ). Although for many people sight loss cannot be reversed or cured, low vision aids (LVAs) can have a positive impact on residual functional sight ( Crossland, Starke, Imielski, Wolffsohn, & Webster, 2019 ; Binns, Bunce, Dickinson, Harper, Tudor-Edwards, Woodhouse, et al, 2012 ; Hooper, Jutai, Strong, & Russell-Minda, 2008 ; Peterson, Wolffsohn, Rubinstein, & Lowe, 2003 ; Virgili, Acosta, Bentley, Giacomelli, Allcock, & Evans, 2018 ), with a prominent research focus on restoring the ability to read ( Virgili et al, 2018 ). Optical low vision aids tend to be task specific, with constraints on magnification, field of view, working distance, and ease of use: stronger optical magnifiers typically have a smaller field of view, are harder to align, and are more affected by hand movement than weaker devices.…”

Personalized Telerehabilitation for a Head-mounted Low Vision Aid: A Randomized Feasibility Study

“…The questions specifically developed for this study about device user's characteristics and changes in use identified that the activities for which eSight device was most used were as follows: reading and watching TV (see Appendix, available at http://links.lww.com/OPX/A493 , for detailed individual goals), a finding that is consistent with other studies on head-mounted display systems. 7 , 32 Those who reported nonuse of the device were those for which these activities were the least performed with the eSight. The activities for which the device was least used included cooking, shopping, and meetings.…”