Does visual restitution training change absolute homonymous visual field defects? A fundus controlled study

Reinhard, Jens; Schreiber, A; Schiefer, Ulrich; Kasten, Erich; Sabel, Bernhard A.; Kenkel, Sigrid; Vonthein, Reinhard; Trauzettel‐Klosinski, Susanne

doi:10.1136/bjo.2003.040543

Cited by 178 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(2009) and Reinhard et al. (2005) who examined whether VRT has the potential to change absolute hemianopic field defects, reporting none of their seventeen patients to have an explicit change in defect after training. The latter study was not included in the review as its focus was on recovery of visual field following VRT and not adaptation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter study was not included in the review as its focus was on recovery of visual field following VRT and not adaptation. In trials where eye movement recording was not undertaken, improvement in visual field due to eye movements cannot be excluded (Reinhard et al., 2005; Schmielau & Wong, 2007). However, studies where eye movements were measured did confirm visual field recovery, arguing against the hypothesis that compensatory eye movements alone can explain vision recovery (Gall et al., 2016; Kasten, Bunzenthal, & Sabel, 2006).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adaptation to poststroke visual field loss: A systematic review

Howard

Rowe

2018

Brain and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo provide a systematic overview of the factors that influence how a person adapts to visual field loss following stroke.MethodA systematic review was undertaken (data search period 1861–2016) inclusive of systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies, and case controlled studies. Studies including adult subjects with hemifield visual field loss, which occured as a direct consequence of stroke, were included. Search terms included a range of MESH terms as well as alternative terms relating to stroke, visual field loss, visual functions, visual perception, and adaptation. Articles were selected by two authors independently, and data were extracted by one author, being verified by the second. All included articles were assessed for risk of bias and quality using checklists appropriate to the study design.ResultsForty‐seven articles (2,900 participants) were included in the overall review, categorized into two sections. Section one included seventeen studies where the reviewers were able to identify a factor they considered as likely to be important for the process of adaptation to poststroke visual field loss. Section two included thirty studies detailing interventions for visual field loss that the reviewers deemed likely to have an influence on the adaptation process. There were no studies identified which specifically investigated and summarized the factors that influence how a person adapts to visual field loss following stroke.ConclusionThere is a substantial amount of evidence that patients can be supported to compensate and adapt to visual field loss following stroke using a range of strategies and methods. However, this systematic review highlights the fact that many unanswered questions in the area of adaptation to visual field loss remain. Further research is required on strategies and methods to improve adaptation to aid clinicians in supporting these patients along their rehabilitation journey.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation to poststroke visual field loss: A systematic review

Howard

Rowe

2018

Brain and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The length of session varied from 30 min to 1 hr for around six months of training (Gall & Sabel, 2012; Mueller, Mast, & Sabel, 2007; Poggel et al., 2007; Reinhard et al., 2005; Romano, Schulz, Kenkel, & Todd, 2008; Sabel, Kenkel, & Kasten, 2004; Sabel, Kruse, Wolf, & Guenther, 2013). The shorter sessions were repeated more than once per day, adding up to a possible maximum per day commitment of 70 min.…”

Section: Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, for studies in which fixation was controlled and assessed using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope, little or no change in the visual field area was noted (Marshall, Chmayssani, O'Brien, Handy, & Greenstein, 2010; Reinhard et al., 2005; Sabel et al., 2004). Despite little or no improvement in the visual field area, patients reported an improvement in quality of life and ADL, such as mobility and reading (Bergsma et al., 2012; Gall & Sabel, 2012; Mueller et al., 2007; Plow, Obretenova, Fregni, Pascual‐Leone, & Merabet, 2012; Sabel et al., 2004).…”

Section: Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The treatment methods for post‐stroke visual impairment: A systematic review

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo provide a systematic overview of interventions for stroke related visual impairments.MethodA systematic review of the literature was conducted including randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies, systematic reviews, and retrospective medical note reviews. All languages were included and translation obtained. This review covers adult participants (aged 18 years or over) diagnosed with a visual impairment as a direct cause of a stroke. Studies which included mixed populations were included if over 50% of the participants had a diagnosis of stroke and were discussed separately. We searched scholarly online resources and hand searched articles and registers of published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. Search terms included a variety of MESH terms and alternatives in relation to stroke and visual conditions. Article selection was performed by two authors independently. Data were extracted by one author and verified by a second. The quality of the evidence and risk of bias was assessed using appropriate tools dependant on the type of article.ResultsForty‐nine articles (4142 subjects) were included in the review, including an overview of four Cochrane systematic reviews. Interventions appraised included those for visual field loss, ocular motility deficits, reduced central vision, and visual perceptual deficits.ConclusionFurther high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine the effectiveness of interventions for treating post‐stroke visual impairments. For interventions which are used in practice but do not yet have an evidence base in the literature, it is imperative that these treatments be addressed and evaluated in future studies.

show abstract

“…Improvements have been noted as decreases in the border of the hemianopic field of 5 degrees on average, with a range of 0 to 20 degrees, [23][24][25][26] although not all studies have found improvement. 27 Scanning therapy (ST) seeks to improve visual function in hemianopsia by teaching eye and head scans into the hemianopic field. Scanning with eye movements have been reported to improve visual search 28 with scanning improvements of 35 degrees into the hemianopic field.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%