Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills
Published on: February 13, 2020
Digital Technology Use Among Older Adults With Vision Impairment
Jonathan Thomas1,2, Louay Almidani2, Bonnielin K Swenor3,4
1Texas A&M School of Medicine, Bryan, Texas.
Importance:
Telehealth has the potential to improve health for older adults, but many access disparities exist, including for those with vision impairment (VI).
Objective:
To examine the associations between VI and digital technology access measures in US older adults.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This was a cross-sectional study that included Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older. Beneficiary data were obtained from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) 2021; data collection was conducted from June 2020 through January 2021. Data were analyzed September 2023.
Exposure:
VI, measured on categorical (distance and near VI [>0.30 logMAR], contrast sensitivity impairment [CSI; <1.55 logCS], and any VI [distance VI, near VI, or CSI]), and continuous (distance and near acuity [logMAR] and contrast sensitivity [logCS]) scales.
Main Outcomes:
Self-reported outcomes of digital technology access from the technological environment component of the NHATS.
Results:
Of the 2822 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 78.5 [5.6] years; 1605 female [54.7%]) included in this study, patients self-identified with the following race and ethnicity categories (weighted percentages): 575 non-Hispanic Black (8.0%), 132 Hispanic (7.0%), 2019 non-Hispanic White (81.7%), and 63 non-Hispanic other race (3.4%), which included American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian, multiracial, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, or other specified race. A total of 1077 of 2822 patients (32.3%) had any VI. In multivariable logistic regression models, older adults with any VI had lower odds of having or knowing how to use a cellphone (odds ratio [OR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38-0.88), computer (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79), or tablet (OR, 0.68, 95% CI = 0.54-0.85) than peers without VI. In other models, near VI was associated with lower odds of having and knowing how to use a phone (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87), computer (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75), or tablet (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.52-0.81) compared with no near VI. CSI was associated with lower odds of having and knowing how to use a phone (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99) or computer (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93) compared with no CSI. Distance VI was only associated with lower odds of having and knowing how to use a cellphone (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.95). Any VI and individual categorical VI measures were not associated with other outcomes of digital health- and nonhealth-related experiences. Similar associations were noted when vision was examined on a continuous scale. However, worse distance acuity (per 0.1 logMAR) was associated with being less likely to visit with family or friends on a video call (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98) and to order or refill prescriptions online (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97).
Conclusions And Relevance:
Results suggest that older US adults with VI were less likely to have access to digital technology than peers without VI, although no differences were noted in the report of digital health- and nonhealth-related activities. These findings highlight the potential for inequities that may arise in telehealth for older adults with VI and the necessity to develop strategies to improve accessibility of telemedicine for all.
