Relationship between sensibility and ability to read Braille in diabetics

Abstract

Twenty-five vision-impaired diabetics received an evaluation of sensibility. Each subject had received 2 years of instruction in braille reading at the Konan Rehabilitation Center prior to the sensibility testing. Sensibility evaluation consisted of cutaneous pressure threshold measurements with the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament and evaluation of moving and static two-point discrimination with Disk-Criminator. The ability to read braille was graded by the braille-teaching instructors as good, fair, and unable. The results of the evaluation of sensibility demonstrated that the value of the cutaneous pressure threshold did not correlate with the ability to read braille. Moving and static two-point discrimination were found to correlate highly (P less than .001) with the ability to read braille at a level of fair or good. No patient in this study with a moving two-point discrimination value of 4 or more or a static two-point discrimination value of 5 or more was able to read braille even at the fair level of ability.

Tactile acuity, aging, and braille reading in long-term blindness.

“…Diabetes could have unfortunate consequences for the aging braille or Optacon reader by gravely accelerating the loss of acuity. Thus, Heinrichs and Moorhouse (1969) and Nakada and Dellon (1989) claimed an association between two-point discrimination and ability to read braille by blind persons with diabetes. Although the data are limited (e.g., no objective tests of braille reading were offered), they suggest that a two-point threshold of 5 mm or larger may preclude ability to read braille at even a fair level.…”

The association between tactile, motor and cognitive capacities and braille reading performance: a scoping review of primary evidence to advance research on braille and aging

“…Note that the definition of braille learning age varied across these 3 studies. Garcia [67] did not specifically identify the age at which participants learned braille (except to note that participants had between 1 and 55 years reading experience); Laroche [72] divided participants into two groups (learned before age 10 and learned after age 10); and in Nakada [78], participants had completed two years of braille rehabilitation training yielding braille learning ages of between 18 and 58 (mean 42.6, SD 10.2).…”

“…test, for example, the points of the calipers are applied to the pad of the stationary finger at different distances from each other, in order to determine the minimal distance at which the participant is able to distinguish the presence of one or two points [10]. Given that the center-to-center distance between dots in the standard braille cell is approximately 2.28 mm [9], it is unsurprising that researchers would contemplate whether 2-point threshold measures could be used to predict braille reading ability or whether individuals with a 2-point threshold above 2.28 mm would find it difficult to read standard braille [27,68,78]. Despite these considerations, the studies in this review differ drastically in the extent to which a relationship between passive acuity and braille reading performance is reported.…”

“…These inconsistent findings partially stem from the fact that although the Grating Orientation Test has been found to be a reliable measure of passive tactile perception [42], the two-point discrimination test depends heavily on the examiner's ability to maintain consistent force with both points across all trials, and is associated with poor test-retest reliability [42,89]. Importantly, it is also difficult to draw specific comparisons across these passive acuity studies, as sufficient demographic information (such as previous braille experience) is not always available, and 3 of the passive acuity studies simply evaluate braille reading performance using a subjective, qualitative scale (cannot read/can read with difficulty/can read well) without specific information about reading rate, accuracy or comprehension [27,68,78].…”