Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2025

A Standardized Obstacle Course for Assessment of Visual Function in Ultra Low Vision and Artificial Vision
Published on: February 11, 2014
Retrospective analysis of low vision assistive products - A 6-year review
Bharat Gurnani1, Kirandeep Kaur2, Priya Sivakumar3
1Department of Cataract, Cornea and Refractive Services, Aravind Eye Hospital, Puducherry, India.
Purpose:
The purpose of the study was to analyze the demographics, visual acuity (VA), etiologies, recommended low vision assistive products (LVAP), and the acceptance rates of LVAP in various age groups.
Methods:
This was a long-term retrospective review of all the patients presenting to the low vision clinic of our tertiary eye care hospital from January 2011 to December 2016. Data obtained included age, gender, VA, visual fields, ocular pathology causing the low vision, and types of LVAP advised. The primary outcome was to analyze the type of LVAP prescribed in different age groups, and the secondary outcome was the acceptance rate of LVAP.
Results:
We analyzed the results of 8309 patients, out of which 2844 (34%. 2) were <15 years of age, 2425 (29.5%) were between 16-40 years, and 3013 (36.3%) were above 40 years. A total of 5522 (66.4%) had best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) ranging from 6/18-3/60, and 2796 (33.6%) had BCVA from 3/60-No PL. Approximately 38% improved with LVAPs. The most common etiology was retinitis pigmentosa in 1545 (18.6%) patients, followed by congenital nystagmus in 1482 (17.8%), and the least was albinism 383 (4.6%). Maximum prescribed and accepted LVAP were hand and stand magnifiers among 1017 (44.3%) and 512 (52.6%) patients, respectively.
Conclusion:
Products that are easy to use, require lesser adaptability, are cheap, and require lower maintenance have maximum acceptance rates. We suggest that great emphasis should be laid on training, education, and guidance for low vision rehabilitation centers.
More Related Videos
07:12Development of a Gaze-Contingent Display Framework Designed for Perceptual and Oculomotor Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss
Published on: April 11, 2025
06:19Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
Published on: September 27, 2024