Journals / Türk Oftalmoloji Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3

Current Approaches to Low Vision (Re)Habilitation

Az Görme Re/Habilitasyonunda Son Yaklaşımlar

Pages
154–163
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Low vision patients must be guided to the right centers at the appropriate age, with appropriate indications, and with realistic expectations, and the rehabilitation process must be carried out as a multidisciplinary collaboration.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With increased life expectancy at birth and especially the rising incidence of age-related macular degeneration, low vision (re)habilitation is becoming more important today.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Important factors to consider when presenting rehabilitation and treatment options to patients presenting to low vision centers include the diagnosis of the underlying disease, the patient’s age, their existing visual functions (especially distance and near visual acuity), whether visual loss is central or peripheral, whether their disease is progressive or not, the patient’s education level, and their expectations from us.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Low vision patients must be guided to the right centers at the appropriate age, with appropriate indications, and with realistic expectations, and the rehabilitation process must be carried out as a multidisciplinary collaboration.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

With increased life expectancy at birth and especially the rising incidence of age-related macular degeneration, low vision (re)habilitation is becoming more important today. Important factors to consider when presenting rehabilitation and treatment options to patients presenting to low vision centers include the diagnosis of the underlying disease, the patient’s age, their existing visual functions (especially distance and near visual acuity), whether visual loss is central or peripheral, whether their disease is progressive or not, the patient’s education level, and their expectations from us. Low vision patients must be guided to the right centers at the appropriate age, with appropriate indications, and with realistic expectations, and the rehabilitation process must be carried out as a multidisciplinary collaboration.

Özet

Az görme re/habilitasyonu, doğumda beklenen yaşam ümidinin artması ve özellikle yaşa bağlı maküla dejenerasyonunun görülmesıklığının yükselmesi ile günümüzde daha önemli bir hal almıştır. Az görme polikliniğine gelen bir hastaya rehabilitasyon ve tedaviseçeneklerini sunarken zeminde yatan hastalığın tanısı, uzak ve yakın görme keskinliği başta olmak üzere görsel işlevler, görme kaybınınmerkezi ya da periferik olması, yaşı, hastalığının progresif olup olmaması, eğitim seviyesi ve bizden beklentisi çok önemlidir. Az görenhastalar, doğru yaşlarda, uygun endikasyonlarla ve gerçekçi beklentilerle doğru merkezlere yönlendirilmeli ve rehabilitasyon sürecimultidisipliner bir şekilde yapılmalıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

İDİL, Ş. A., ALTINBAY, D. (2022). Current Approaches to Low Vision (Re)Habilitation. Türk Oftalmoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3, 154–163. https://ajindex.com/articles/637749

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Humphry RC, Thompson GM. Low vision aids-evaluation in a general eye department. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK. 1986;105:296-303
  2. Temel A. Low vision aids (evaluation of 185 patients). Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1989;9:327-331
  3. Van Rens GHMB, Chmielowski RJM, Lemmens WAJG. Results obtained with low vision aids. Doc Ophthalmol. 1991;78:205-210
  4. Üretmen Ö, Yağcı A, Eğrilmez S, Kerci G, Ardıç K. Düşük görme yardımcıları ile klinik sonuçlarımız. MN Oft. 1999;6:261-65
  5. Akyurt, Akın. Az görenlere yardım gerekliliği ve etkinliği. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2003;33:154-160
  6. Tatlıpınar S, Kadayıfçılar S, Eldem B. Yaşa bağlı makula dejenerasyonu olgularında az görenlere yardım cihazı uygulamaları ve sonuçları. Turkish Journal Geriatrics. 2001;4:19-21
  7. Altınbay D. Az görenlere yardım cihazı uygulamaları ve teleskopik gözlük kullanma oranları. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2013;43:427-431
  8. Peli E, Bowers AR, Keeney K, Jung JH. High-Power Prismatic Devices for Oblique Peripheral Prisms. Optom Vis Sci. 2016;93:521-533
  9. Apfelbaum H, Peli E. Tunnel Vision Prismatic Field Expansion: Challenges and Requirements. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2015;4:8
  10. Gall C, Sabel BA. Reading performance after vision rehabilitation of subjects with homonymous visual field defects. PM R. 2012;4:928-935
  11. Rohrschneider K, Bültmann S, Springer C. Use of fundus perimetry (microperimetry) to quantify macular sensitivity. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2008;27:536-548
  12. Kameda T, Tanabe T, Hangai M, Ojima T, Aikawa H, Yoshimura N. Fixation behavior in advanced stage glaucoma assessed by the MicroPerimeter MP-1. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2009;53:580-587
  13. Şentürk F, Karaçorlu SA, Özdemir H, Karaçorlu M, Uysal Ö. Klasik ve gizli koroid neovaskülarizasyonlarında mikroperimetrik değişiklikler. Ret-Vit. 2007;15:277-281
  14. Ozturk F, Yavas GF, Küsbeci T, Ermis SS. A comparison among Humphrey field analyzer, micro-perimetry and Heidelberg retinal tomograph in the evaluation of macula in primary open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2008;17:118-121
  15. Lima VC, Prata TS, De Moraes CG, Kim J, Seiple W, Rosen RB, Liebmann JM, Ritch R. A comparison between microperimetry and standard achromatic of the central visual field in eyes with glaucomatous paracentral visual-field defects. Br J Ophthalmol. 2010;94:64-67
  16. Fujii GY, de Juan E Jr, Humayun MS, Sunness JS, Chang TS, Rossi JV. Characteristics of visual loss by scanning laser ophthalmoscope microperimetry in eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary