Determining magnification for reading with low vision

Background : In the past, practitioners have used distance and/or near visual acuity (VA) to calculate required magnification for low vision aids. Magnification was usually under‐estimated when compared with the final magnification prescribed. Recent studies have emphasised the importance of acuity reserve in determining the required magnification for optimum reading rate. Two different approaches have been proposed for the appropriate acuity reserve to use in calculating magnification. These are a fixed acuity reserve of 0.3 log unit or an individual determination of optimum acuity reserve. The aim of this study was to investigate the magnification and reading rates with low vision aids selected by the two methods. Methods : Nineteen low vision subjects with age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) who were experienced magnifier‐users were recruited. Reading rates and near VA with low vision aids determined by the fixed and individual acuity reserve methods were compared with the same measures made with the subjects' own magnifiers. Results : There were no significant differences in reading rate and near VA measured with low vision aids selected by either the fixed or individual acuity reserve methods or the subjects' own magnifiers. Reading rate with low vision aids was not significantly different from reading rate for large print with conventional near additions. Thus, for experienced users, magnifiers do not cause reduced reading rate. Conclusions : The fixed acuity reserve method is simple to apply as only near VA and print size of the target reading task are required. For the individual acuity reserve method, reading rates at different print sizes need to be measured. We recommend the use of a fixed acuity reserve (0.3 log unit) for the calculation of required magnification for low vision patients. If near VA or reading rate are not satisfactory with the magnification calculated by this method, individual assessment of required acuity reserve is necessary.     

Prescribing near magnification for low vision patients

Most patients with low vision request help with reading. Despite improvements in the assessment of visual functions, determining the appropriate magnification for reading still often involves a trial and error approach. Recent research has shown that with accurate and systematic assessments of vision, the required magnification can be predicted but this magnification needs to be much higher than has been previously recommended. This paper presents a systematic approach to enable practitioners to determine the power of a near addition or simple magnifier needed to assist patients with mild or moderate low vision who may present seeking help for reading. Guidelines for appropriate referral to low vision services are also provided.     

Improvement of reading speed after providing of low vision aids in patients with age‐related macular degeneration

Purpose: Age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) is the most common cause of severe visual impairment, including loss of reading ability, among elderly persons in developed countries. The aim of the present study was to evaluate reading ability before and after providing of appropriate low vision aids. Methods: Five hundred and thirty patients with different stages of AMD (age 82 ± 8 years) were included in this retrospective study. All patients underwent a standardized ophthalmological examination including evaluation of magnification requirement and careful providing of low vision aids. Before and after the provision of low vision aids, reading speed [words per minute (wpm)] was evaluated using standardized reading texts. Results: For the whole group, the average best‐corrected distance visual acuity of the better eye was 0.18 ± 0.15, with 69% of patients having visual acuity of 0.1 (20/200) or better. The mean magnification requirement was 7.4 ± 6.3‐fold (range 2–25). Visual rehabilitation was achieved with optical visual aids in 58% of patients, whereas 42% of patients needed electronically closed‐circuit TV systems. Mean reading speed was 20 ± 33 wpm before and increased significantly to 72 ± 35 (p < 0.0001) after the provision of low vision aids for the whole group. Between patients with visual acuity < 0.1 and patients with visual acuity of 0.1 or better, there are highly significant differences in reading speed before (0.4 ± 3.8 versus 20 ± 28 wpm, p ≤ 0.0001) and after providing of visual aids (40 ± 13 versus 84 ± 30 wpm, p ≤ 0.0001). Patients with severe visual impairment (visual acuity ≤ 0.1) showed significantly lower improvement of reading speed compared to patients with visual acuity of 0.1 or better following rehabilitation (p ≤ 0.0001). Before providing of low vision aids, only 16% of patients were able to read; in contrast, reading ability was achieved in 94% of patients after the provision of low vision aids for the whole group. Conclusion: Our results indicate the great value of low vision rehabilitation through adequate providing of vision aids for the improvement of reading ability, with a highly significant increase of reading speed without training of eccentric viewing in patients with retained central fixation. The prompt implementation of low vision aids in patients with macular degeneration will help them to maintain and regain their reading ability, which can lead to an increase in independence, communication, mental agility and quality of life.     

Effect of magnification and field of view on reading speed using a CCTV

Reading speeds were measured in 18 subjects with normal vision and 10 with low vision for each of 20 experimental conditions with different magnifications and field sizes on the Closed Circuit Television System (CCTV). There was a significant difference between the results for the two groups of subjects. These results suggested that in low-vision patients with faster reading speeds, minimum magnification for maximum field size on the CCTV would be valid advice. For low-vision patients who read more slowly, reading speed may improve at higher magnifications despite reduced field size.     

手持放大镜对阅读速度的影响

目的探讨手持放大镜对视力正常者和低视力患者阅读速度的影响。设计前瞻性对照研究。研究对象初次使用手持放大镜的低视力患者13例和37例视力正常者。方法分别测试视力正常者不用手持放大镜阅读小五号字及初次使用＋10D、＋20D两种不同度数的手持放大镜、采用10cm、35cm两种不同距离阅读小五号字时的速度;并测量低视力患者首次使用手持放大镜阅读小五号字和不用放大镜阅读相同放大率的大字印刷体的阅读速度。主要指标阅读速度（字数／分钟）。结果视力正常者不用手持放大镜的阅读速度（194．6±45．2字／分）比用＋10D手持放大镜在眼睛到放大镜10cm（159．7±44．7字／分）、35em（162．5±46．7字／分）的阅读速度快,也比用＋20D手持放大镜在眼睛到放大镜10em（150．3±43．3字份）、35cm（150．0±43．4字,分）的阅读速度快,差异有统计学意义（P=0．001、0．002、0．000、0．000）;在相同放大倍率下,眼睛到放大镜的距离分别为10cm和35cm时,阅读速度的差异没有统计学意义（＋10D,P=0．783;＋20D,P=-0．981）。低视力患者首次使用手持放大镜阅读小五号字的速度（54．2±8．2字／分）比不用放大镜阅读相同放大率的大字印刷体的速度（64．0±9．4字／分）要慢,两者相比差别有统计学意义（P=0．000）。结论初次使用手持放大镜阅读者,无论是正常人还是低视力患者阅读速度均慢。因此低视力患者使用放大镜时要有熟练过程。（眼科,2010,19：139—141）     

A retrospective study of low-vision cases in an Indian tertiary eye-care hospital

PURPOSE: To obtain data on the characteristics of low-vision patients seen at a tertiary eye care hospital in India. METHODS: Records of 410 patients were retrospectively reviewed at the Centre for Sight Enhancement, L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India. Patient underwent a comprehensive clinical low-vision examination. Data obtained included age, gender, consanguinity, visual acuity, visual fields, ocular conditions causing low vision and types of low-vision devices and methods prescribed. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety seven (72%) of 450 patients were male. One-fifth were in the 11-20 years age group (21%). Visual acuity in the better eye was < 6/18-6/60 in almost half these patients (49.3%). One hundred and twenty two patients (29.9%) referred with a visual acuity of > or = 6/18, either had difficulty in reading normal print or had restricted visual fields. The main causes for low vision were: retinitis pigmentosa (19%), diabetic retinopathy (13%), Macular diseases (17.7%), and degenerative myopia (9%). Visual rehabilitation was achieved using accurate correction of ametropia (174 patients), approach magnification (74 patients) and telescopes (45 patients) for recognising faces, watching television and board work. Spectacle magnifiers (187 patients), hand/stand magnifiers (9 patients), closed-circuit television (3 patients), overhead illumination lamp (143 patients) and reading stand (24 patients) were prescribed for reading tasks. Light control devices (146 patients) were used for glare control, and cane (128 patients) and flashlight (50 patients) for mobility. Patients were trained in activities to improve their daily living skills, (54 patients); counselled in environmental modification (144 patients) and ancillary care (63 patients) for educational and vocational needs. CONCLUSION: Data obtained from this study elucidates the characteristics of low-vision patients. This information is likely to help in the development of appropriate low vision services.     

Reading with low vision: the impact of research on clinical management*

The past 40 years has seen a great expansion in low‐vision research, which has changed low‐vision teaching and our clinical management of people with low vision. Australian optometrists have contributed significantly to this research and the development of multidisciplinary low‐vision services. This paper reviews the research that has shaped our clinical assessment and patient management for reading by adults with low vision. The major improvements in clinical assessment of low vision for reading were brought about by the improvements in distance and near visual acuity measurements during the 1970s and research during the 1980s and 1990s showing the factors affecting the reading rate. These changes, together with a different method for representing the magnification provided by optical and electronic systems, allows a scientific, logical and practical method for prescribing magnification. An illustration of the step‐by‐step approach for prescribing magnification for low‐vision reading that is easy to apply in any clinical practice is included.     

Improved reading performance using individualized compensation filters for observers with losses in central vision

By boosting the amplitudes of the intermediate spatial frequencies more than the amplitude of the lower spatial frequencies, reading performance improved significantly when observers with losses in central vision read words that were filtered. Words that were filtered using an image enhancement function based on an observer's losses in visual function relative to a normal observer (1) reduced the magnification (30-70% less magnification was needed) and (2) increased the reading rate (2-3 times), measured in words per minute. The greater the loss in central visual function, the more individualized compensation filters reduced the magnification needed for word recognition. Individualized compensation filters improved the clarity and visibility of words for low vision observers. This study also found that the shape of the enhancement function was important to determine the optimum compensation filter for improving reading performance. In addition, the individualized compensation filters can be implemented by inexpensive hardware, for example in a closed circuit television (CCTV), to provide a significantly more effective low vision aid for observers with losses in central vision to read text, than is provided using only magnification.     

Primary success with low vision aids in age-related macular degeneration.

The benefit obtained from various low vision aids (LVAs) was studied in 65 consecutive patients with atrophic (70.3%) or disciform (29.7%) age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). 13.8% were able to read newsprint with age-related reading correction under proper lighting conditions. The primary success achieved with LVAs was good, 91.4% of patients being able to read newsprint. In most cases a simple magnifier (52.3%), high-powered reading glasses (10.8%) or Fonda's glasses (12.8%) were sufficient. The magnification preferred was 5x or less in 25.6% and greater than 5x to 9x in 48.8%. Patients with disciform degeneration required higher magnification than those with atrophic degeneration. It is concluded that most patients with ARMD found low vision aids useful for reading purposes and that a simple optical device was sufficient to achieve reading vision.     

Low vision aids for reading in scar stage of age-related macular degeneration

PURPOSE: To evaluate the inter-relationship among near visual acuity, eccentricity of preferred retinal locus(PRL), and choice of low vision aids for reading in patients with bilateral age-related macular degeneration(AMD). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The preferred eye of 44 patients having bilateral disciform stage AMD was examined. The PRL was detected and its eccentricity from the fovea was measured by scanning laser ophthalmoscopic microperimetry. Magnification of a low vision aid for reading newsprint was determined by the critical print size which was calculated using the MNREAD-J. The type of preferred aid was chosen from high-plus lens glasses, magnifiers, and closed-circuit televisions. The inter-relationship among near visual acuity, eccentricity of the PRL, and magnification and type of low vision aid for reading were evaluated. RESULTS: The magnification of the aid was correlated with the eccentricity of PRL in eyes with near visual acuity of 0.2 or less although no correlation was found in eyes with near visual acuity better than 0.3. High plus lens glasses were selected by patients with near visual acuity better than 0.2 and eccentricity of 2 degrees or less. Magnifiers were selected by patients with near visual acuity better than 0.1 and eccentricity of 5 degrees or less. Closed-circuit televisions were selected by patients with near visual acuity of 0.1 or less and eccentricity of 5 degrees or more. CONCLUSION: The eccentricity of PRL should be taken into account in determining low vision aids for reading, especially in patients with near visual acuity of 0.2 or less. Choice of the type of low vision aid depends on not only near visual acuity but also on eccentricity of PRL.     

Predicting prescribed magnification.

AIM: To determine the best method of estimating the optimum magnification needed by visually impaired patients. METHODS: The magnification of low vision aids prescribed to 187 presbyopic visually impaired patients for reading newspapers or books was compared with logMAR distance and near acuity (at 25 cm) and magnification predicted by +4 D step near additions. RESULTS: Distance letter (r = 0.58) and near word visual acuity (r = 0.67) were strongly correlated to the prescribed magnification as were predictive formulae based on these measures. Prediction using the effect of proximal magnification resulted in a similar correlation (r = 0.67) and prediction was poorer in those who did not benefit from proximal magnification. The difference between prescribed and predicted magnification was found to be unrelated to the condition causing visual impairment (F = 2.57, p = 0.08), the central visual field status (F = 0.57, p = 0.57) and patient psychology (F = 0.44, p = 0.51), but was higher in those prescribed stand magnifiers than high near additions (F = 5.99, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The magnification necessary to perform normal visual tasks can be predicted in the majority of cases using visual acuity measures, although measuring the effect of proximal magnification demonstrates the effect of stronger glasses and identifies those in whom prescribed magnification is more difficult to predict.     

Reading performance in children with low vision

Purpose: While educators and optometrists are concerned with reading efficiency in children with low vision, in most low vision assessments, children's reading performance is assessed only by a brief evaluation of reading fluency. We examined the relationships between clinical vision measures and reading performance in children with low vision. Methods: Subjects were 71 students with low vision, aged seven to 18 years. The vision and reading performance measures were: high contrast distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity using both the Pelli‐Robson and LH symbol charts, near text visual acuity and reading rates on a range of print sizes. Results: Most children achieved maximum reading rate at print sizes between 2.5 and seven times larger than threshold print size. Maximum reading rate increased significantly with age and near visual acuity. There was no significant relationship between reading rate and contrast sensitivity. Conclusions: The majority of children with low vision can achieve near normal reading rates with magnification. Age is the strongest predictor of reading rate in children with low vision. They need print sizes well above threshold to achieve maximum reading rate. Routine contrast sensitivity testing of visually impaired students is not indicated for reading assessment.     

Vision and self‐reported mobility performance in patients with low vision

Background: As vision plays a significant role in mobility performance, it is usual to refer low vision patients, particularly those who complain of mobility difficulties, for orientation and mobility (O&M) training to help them maintain safe independent travel. Our study aimed to determine whether there was a relationship between measures of vision and self‐reported mobility, and the applicability of a patient‐based mobility assessment in patients with heterogeneous causes of visual loss. Method: We assessed the high and low contrast visual acuity, visual field and scanning ability of 30 patients with low vision. A validated mobility questionnaire was used to assess the participants’ perceived visual ability for independent mobility. Results: Vision was significantly correlated with self‐reported mobility performance, however, visual field was a significant predictor accounting for 56.5 per cent of the variance. The instrument was well constructed with valid content and high reliability scores. Conclusions: Self‐reported mobility performance together with measures of vision could be used as a guide to refer patients for O&M training. The patient‐based assessment instrument was valid to measure perceived visual ability for independent mobility in patients with heterogeneous causes of visual loss.     

Visual function: the problem with eccentricity

Age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in developed countries. With an ageing population, the prevalence of such a condition has resulted in a large proportion of the population relying on peripheral vision to undertake activities of daily living. Peripheral vision is not a scaled‐down version of the fovea, simply requiring larger print or increased contrast for detection of objects or reading text. Even when print size is scaled and eye movements are minimised, the peripheral retina cannot perform at the level of the foveal region. Understanding how and why reading performance is limited as a function of eccentricity has important implications for how we approach rehabilitation of patients with central visual loss. This brief review of the extensive literature on reading with peripheral vision and the research aimed at better reading rehabilitation for low vision patients focuses on why many of the problems associated with the reduced reading capability of peripheral vision cannot be completely solved with magnification, reducing eye movements or modifying print.     

Impact of age related macular degeneration on quality of life

AIMS: To describe the impact of age related macular degeneration (AMD) on quality of life and explore the association with vision, health, and demographic variables. METHODS: Adult participants diagnosed with AMD and with impaired vision (visual acuity <6/12) were assessed with the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. Participants rated the extent that vision restricted participation in activities affecting quality of life and completed the Short Form General Health Survey (SF-12) and a sociodemographic questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean age of the 106 participants (66% female) was 83.6 years (range 64-98). One quarter had mild vision impairment, (VA<6/12-6/18) and 75% had moderate or severely impaired vision. Participants reported from at least "a little" concern on 23 of the 32 IVI items including reading, emotional health, mobility, and participation in relevant activities. Those with mild and moderate vision impairment were similarly affected but significantly different from those with severe vision loss (p<0.05). Distance vision was associated with IVI scores but not age, sex, or duration of vision loss. CONCLUSION: AMD affects many quality of life related activities and not just those related to reading. Referral to low vision care services should be considered for people with mild vision loss and worse.     

Psychophysics of reading--II. Low vision

Very little is known about the effects of visual impairment on reading. We used psychophysical methods to study reading by 16 low-vision observers. Reading rates were measured for text scanned across the face of a TV monitor while varying parameters that are likely to be important in low vision: angular character size, number of characters in the field, number of dots composing each character, contrast polarity (white-on-black vs black-on-white text), and character spacing. Despite diverse pathologies and degrees of vision loss in our sample, several major generalizations emerged. There is a wide variation in peak reading rates among low-vision observers, but 64% of the variance can be accounted for by two major distinctions: intact central fields vs central-field loss and cloudy vs clear ocular media. Peak reading rates for observers with central-field loss were very low (median 25 words/minute), while peak reading rates for observers with intact central fields were at least 90 words/minute (median 130 words/minute). Most low-vision readers require magnification to obtain characters of optimal size. Sloan M acuity was a better predictor of optimal character size than Snellen acuity, accounting for 72% of the variance. Low-vision reading is similar to normal reading in several respects. For example, both show the same dependence on the number of characters in the field. Our results provide estimates of the best reading performance to be expected from low-vision observers with characteristic forms of vision loss, and the stimulus parameters necessary for optimal performance. These results will be useful in the development of clinical tests of low vision, and in the design of low-vision reading aids.     

Low vision correction for high myopia.

High myopia is favorable for low vision corrections because the vision has usually been poor since childhood and the person has been able to read at close range, producing magnification. For near vision, in addition to bringing objects close, magnification is produced by high-add bifocals, trifocals, strong near vision spectacles and nonspectacle magnifiers. Hand magnifiers held at a distance from the eye are used with the spectacle correction. This paper describes the Visolett, used without correction or near vision correction, as the preferred non-spectacle magnifier because the reading area is self-illuminated, it doubles the approach magnification, rests on the paper, is simple to use, produces binocular vision, and attracts the least attention. Combination method of magnification consists in the use of the Visolett in addition to a spectacle magnifier, which doubles the magnification.     

Occupational therapy interventions in low vision rehabilitation

Low vision can significantly decrease a person's functional ability and independence. With the continuing rise in age of our population, the number of people with low vision will increase substantially. Restoring and maintaining their ability to function independently through the use of specific interventions is an intricate process that calls for the collaboration of various health care professionals. Occupational therapists (OTs) and occupational therapy assistants are essential members of the multidisciplinary rehabilitation team providing such interventions. OTs in low vision rehabilitation enhance performance for specific activities of daily living by training skills that are dependent on residual vision, such as reading and writing. OTs also conduct environmental assessments in the home and in the workplace or school to improve and promote a safe environment for patients with low vision. OTs may also assist in developing rehabilitation programs for orientation and mobility, driving, and vision rehabilitation therapy. To prepare for the future needs of the ageing Canadian population, more low vision rehabilitation practitioners and more funding for multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs are required.     

Relationship between slow visual processing and reading speed in people with macular degeneration

PURPOSE: People with macular degeneration (MD) often read slowly even with adequate magnification to compensate for acuity loss. Oculomotor deficits may affect reading in MD, but cannot fully explain the substantial reduction in reading speed. Central-field loss (CFL) is often a consequence of macular degeneration, necessitating the use of peripheral vision for reading. We hypothesized that slower temporal processing of visual patterns in peripheral vision is a factor contributing to slow reading performance in MD patients. METHODS: Fifteen subjects with MD, including 12 with CFL, and five age-matched control subjects were recruited. Maximum reading speed and critical print size were measured with rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP). Temporal processing speed was studied by measuring letter-recognition accuracy for strings of three randomly selected letters centered at fixation for a range of exposure times. Temporal threshold was defined as the exposure time yielding 80% recognition accuracy for the central letter. RESULTS: Temporal thresholds for the MD subjects ranged from 159 to 5881 ms, much longer than values for age-matched controls in central vision (13 ms, p<0.01). The mean temporal threshold for the 11 MD subjects who used eccentric fixation (1555.8 +/- 1708.4 ms) was much longer than the mean temporal threshold (97.0 +/- 34.2 ms, p<0.01) for the age-matched controls at 10 degrees in the lower visual field. Individual temporal thresholds accounted for 30% of the variance in reading speed (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The significant association between increased temporal threshold for letter recognition and reduced reading speed is consistent with the hypothesis that slower visual processing of letter recognition is one of the factors limiting reading speed in MD subjects.