These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Veterans Affairs Low-vision Intervention Trial II: One-year Follow-up.
    Author: Stelmack JA, Tang C, Wei Y, Rose K, Ballinger R, Whitman O, Chronister C, Sayers S, Massof RW, LOVIT II Study Group.
    Journal: Optom Vis Sci; 2019 Oct; 96(10):718-725. PubMed ID: 31592954.
    Abstract:
    SIGNIFICANCE: One-year follow-up is recommended for patients with macular diseases to assess functional changes associated with disease progression and to modify low-vision (LV) treatment plans, if indicated. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to observe 255 patients with macular diseases who received LV rehabilitation (rehabilitation with a therapist) or basic LV services (LV devices dispensed without therapy) during Veterans Affairs Low-vision Intervention Trial II after the trial ended at 4 months until 1-year follow-up. METHODS: The primary outcome measure was visual ability measured with the 48-item Veterans Affairs Low-vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Mean visual ability scores for the treatment groups were compared from baseline to 4 months, 4 months to 1 year, and baseline to 1 year. Changes from baseline to 1 year were compared between the two groups. Predictors of changes in visual ability from 4 months to 1 year were assessed using linear regression. RESULTS: Both groups experienced significant improvement in all measures of visual ability from baseline to 1 year but lost visual reading ability during the observation period (LV rehabilitation group, -0.64 [1.2] logit; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.84 to -0.44 logit; basic LV group, -0.63 [1.4] logit; 95% CI, -0.88 to -0.38 logit), and overall visual ability was lost in the LV rehabilitation group (-0.20 [0.8] logit; 95% CI, -0.34 to -0.06 logit). Loss of visual reading ability in both groups from 4 months to 1 year was predicted by reading ability scores at 4 months, loss of near visual acuity from 4 months to 1 year, and lower EuroQol-5D utility index scores; loss of overall visual ability in the LV rehabilitation group during the same time period was predicted by lower overall ability scores at 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Visual ability significantly improved in all groups from baseline to 1 year. However, the loss of visual reading ability experienced by both groups from 4 months to 1 year reduced the benefit of the services provided.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]