Dataset Information

Acceptability of Telerehabilitation for Magnification Devices for the Visually Impaired Using Various Approaches to Facilitate Accessibility.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

We examined different methods to reduce the burden of accessing technology for videoconferencing during telerehabilitation for magnification devices for the visually impaired.

Methods

During telerehabilitation studies over the past 5 years, vision rehabilitation providers assessed and gave training to visually impaired participants with newly dispensed magnification devices at home who connected to Zoom videoconferencing via loaner tablets or smartphones with assistance from (phase 1; n = 10) investigators by phone, (phase 2; n = 11) local Lions Club volunteers in participants' homes, or (phase 3; n = 24) remote access control software in a randomized controlled trial with 13 usual care controls who received in-office training. All participants completed the same post-telerehabilitation phone survey.

Results

A significantly greater proportion of phase 3 subjects indicated they strongly or mostly agreed that the technology did not interfere with the session (96%) compared to phase 1 (60%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-12.5; P = 0.03) or phase 2 (55%; 95% CI, 1.8-188; P = 0.01). The majority indicated telerehabilitation was as accurate as in person (68%), they were comfortable with telerehabilitation (91%) and interested in a future session (83%), and their magnifier use improved (79%), with no significant differences in these responses between phases (all P > 0.10), including comparisons of participants randomized to telerehabilitation or in-office training in phase 3 who reported similar overall satisfaction levels (P = 0.84).

Conclusions

Participants across all phases reported high levels of acceptance for telerehabilitation, with least interference from technology using remote access control in phase 3.

Translational relevance

With accommodations for accessibility to videoconferencing technology, telerehabilitation for magnification devices can be a feasible, acceptable, and valuable option in countries with resources to support the technology.

SUBMITTER: Bittner AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9358294 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acceptability of Telerehabilitation for Magnification Devices for the Visually Impaired Using Various Approaches to Facilitate Accessibility.

Bittner Ava K AK Yoshinaga Patrick D PD Shepherd John D JD Kaminski John E JE Malkin Alexis G AG Chun Melissa W MW Chan Tiffany L TL Deemer Ashley D AD Ross Nicole C NC

Translational vision science & technology 20220801 8

<h4>Purpose</h4>We examined different methods to reduce the burden of accessing technology for videoconferencing during telerehabilitation for magnification devices for the visually impaired.<h4>Methods</h4>During telerehabilitation studies over the past 5 years, vision rehabilitation providers assessed and gave training to visually impaired participants with newly dispensed magnification devices at home who connected to Zoom videoconferencing via loaner tablets or smartphones with assistance fr ...[more]

PMID: 35917136

Similar Datasets

Project description:SignificanceThis pilot study provides some insight about the potential benefits of telerehabilitation training to improve the reading ability of adults with low vision using magnifiers, to spur future work with larger groups. Telerehabilitation services can be implemented clinically to facilitate access to follow-up care for low vision.PurposeA recent Cochrane systematic review revealed that there are no published visual function outcomes for telerehabilitation with handheld magnification devices for low vision; thus, this study aimed to provide evidence for its preliminary efficacy.MethodsOne to 4 months after receiving a new magnification device (i.e., handheld or stand optical magnifier or portable electronic magnifier), 14 adult low vision patients (with any visual acuity level or ocular diagnosis) received two training sessions at home via telerehabilitation with their vision rehabilitation provider located remotely in-office. Telerehabilitation included a loaner smartphone for Zoom videoconferencing with remote control access software. The Minnesota Low-Vision Reading Test was administered during each of the telerehabilitation sessions to assess near reading (acuity and speed) with the new magnifier.ResultsMean reading acuity with the magnifier was 0.17 logMAR across subjects before training at telerehabilitation session 1, which significantly improved to 0.09 on average a few weeks later at telerehabilitation session 2 (95%confidence interval, -0.001 to -0.16; P = .047). Logarithm reading speed with the magnifier for the reading acuity level at session 1 improved significantly by 0.18 log words per minute on average for the same text size at session 2 (95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.29; P = .002). With the magnifier at session 2, 71% of participants gained at least 0.1 log unit in reading acuity, and half improved by >0.01 in log reading speed; all participants with increased reading speed also improved in reading acuity ( P = .02).ConclusionsThese preliminary data support that telerehabilitation can enhance reading ability and efficiency with newly prescribed magnifiers as an alternative option to in-office vision rehabilitation.

Project description:PurposeAn evidence basis is lacking but needed to compare reading ability outcomes after magnification device training remotely via telerehabilitation versus in office.MethodsA multicenter randomized controlled trial at academic centers and vision rehabilitation private practices randomized 61 visually impaired adults to telerehabilitation or in-office training 1 to 4 months after dispensing new portable electronic, hand-held, or stand optical magnifiers. Telerehabilitation included loaner equipment for Zoom videoconferencing with remote control access software. Using a multilevel regression model, changes in Activity Inventory responses using Rasch analysis estimated reading ability in dimensionless log odds units (logits) (0.14-logit change corresponds with ability change expected from a one-line change in visual acuity).ResultsAcross 47 participants who completed the trial, reading ability with new magnifiers improved significantly by 0.61 logits on average (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.86; P < 0.001) from baseline to 1 month, and by an additional 0.44 logits on average (95% CI, 0.19-0.69; P < 0.001) from 1 to 4months (i.e., after magnifier training), with very similar significant findings for both telerehabilitation (n = 29; mean improvement = 0.44 logits; 95% CI, 0.08-0.80; P = 0.018) and in-office training (n = 18; mean improvement = 0.43 logits; 95% CI, 0.15-0.71; P = .003), and no significant difference between randomized groups across both follow-ups (95% CI, -0.43 to 0.61; P = .73). Vision, demographics, and health factors were nonsignificantly related to reading ability changes from 1 to 4 months.ConclusionsReading ability improved after the provision of newly dispensed magnifiers, with further improvements following additional magnifier training via either telerehabilitation or in-office usual care.Translational relevanceThese findings provide support for the use of telerehabilitation to enhance reading ability with newly prescribed magnifiers as an alternative modality of care delivery.

Project description:BackgroundCardiac rehabilitation (CR) constitutes the recommended nonpharmacological approach for cardiac patients with cardiovascular disease such as people following a recent (i.e., < 4 week) myocardial infarction (MI). Recent evidence suggests that cardiac telerehabilitation may be as effective as traditional (i.e., in person) CR in people following a recent MI. Nevertheless, the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of such an exercise programme has yet to be examined.MethodsForty-four (11 women, 33 men) people following a recent MI were randomly allocated into two groups (online home-based and gym-based groups). The groups underwent a 24-week CR programme thrice per week. All patients performed the baseline, and 24 weeks follow up measurements where feasibility, acceptability, and safety were assessed.ResultsEligibility and recruitment rates were found to be 61.5% and 42%, respectively. Compliance to the thrice weekly, 24-week exercise programme for the online- and gym-based groups were 91.6% and 90.9%, respectively. There were no dropouts during the exercise programmes, however four participants, two from each group, were lost to follow up at 6 months. The average percentage of peak HR (% HRpeak) for the online group was 66.6% ± 4.5 and for the gym-based group was 67.2% ± 5. The average RPE and affect during exercise was for both groups 12 ± 1 ("somewhat hard") and 3 ± 1 ("good"), respectively. During the 6-month exercise intervention period for both groups, the exercise-induced symptoms were minimal to none. The user suitability evaluation questionnaire revealed that the online real time telerehabilitation and tele coaching programme was enjoyable (4.85 ± 0.37) and did not induce general discomfort (1.20 ± 0.41).ConclusionOur cardiac telerehabilitation programme seems to be feasible, acceptable, safe, and enjoyable for people with a recent MI. Our participants had an overall positive experience and acceptability of the cardiac telerehabilitation and tele coaching using wearable devices.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, ID NCT06071273, 10/02/2023, retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Acceptability of Telerehabilitation for Magnification Devices for the Visually Impaired Using Various Approaches to Facilitate Accessibility.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Translational relevance

Publications

Acceptability of Telerehabilitation for Magnification Devices for the Visually Impaired Using Various Approaches to Facilitate Accessibility.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets