Qurat ul Ain Malik, Mumtaz Chaudhry, Adila Anwar, Samra Ahmed, Mutahir Shah, Saif Ullah
{"title":"Non-acceptance of low vision aids (LVADs) among patients presented to eye OPD in Poly Clinic Hospital Islamabad","authors":"Qurat ul Ain Malik, Mumtaz Chaudhry, Adila Anwar, Samra Ahmed, Mutahir Shah, Saif Ullah","doi":"10.52567/trehabj.v7i03.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Vision impairment is a public health problem and every patient with visual impairment doesn’t accept low vision aids (LVA’s). Objective: To explore the non-acceptability rate of low vision aids with the reasons for not opting for them. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology in the Polyclinic Hospital, Islamabad. A sample of n=100 Patients in the selected age groups 20 to 80 years diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, retinitis pigmentosa, diabetic retinopathy, high myopia/hypermetropia, optic atrophy/neuropathies, and glaucoma were recruited using non- probability purposive sampling technique. Data was collected using a predefined form to determine the willingness of low-vision patients to adopt LVAs. The non-acceptance rate was calculated as the percentage of participants declining LVA services, assessed through their responses on the form. Results: The mean age of the participants was 43.48±14 with a range from 20 to 80 years. A total of n=100 patients out of which n=58 were males and n=42 were females. Among these n=100 patients, n=91 patients show non-acceptance with a gender distribution of n=53 male and n=38 female patients. The major reason for non- acceptance was unaffordability for LVA among males (n=19) and n=06), followed by usage difficulty, transportation, fear of losing jobs, social stigma, low necessity, and lack of awareness. Conclusion: Non-acceptance of low vision aids among the study population due to unaffordability, compounded by social stigma, financial constraints, and limited awareness, underscores the need to address these barriers for better device utilization and enhanced quality of life for visually impaired individuals. Keywords: blindness; vision aids; visual impairment","PeriodicalId":90985,"journal":{"name":"The open rehabilitation journal","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open rehabilitation journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52567/trehabj.v7i03.25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Vision impairment is a public health problem and every patient with visual impairment doesn’t accept low vision aids (LVA’s). Objective: To explore the non-acceptability rate of low vision aids with the reasons for not opting for them. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology in the Polyclinic Hospital, Islamabad. A sample of n=100 Patients in the selected age groups 20 to 80 years diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, retinitis pigmentosa, diabetic retinopathy, high myopia/hypermetropia, optic atrophy/neuropathies, and glaucoma were recruited using non- probability purposive sampling technique. Data was collected using a predefined form to determine the willingness of low-vision patients to adopt LVAs. The non-acceptance rate was calculated as the percentage of participants declining LVA services, assessed through their responses on the form. Results: The mean age of the participants was 43.48±14 with a range from 20 to 80 years. A total of n=100 patients out of which n=58 were males and n=42 were females. Among these n=100 patients, n=91 patients show non-acceptance with a gender distribution of n=53 male and n=38 female patients. The major reason for non- acceptance was unaffordability for LVA among males (n=19) and n=06), followed by usage difficulty, transportation, fear of losing jobs, social stigma, low necessity, and lack of awareness. Conclusion: Non-acceptance of low vision aids among the study population due to unaffordability, compounded by social stigma, financial constraints, and limited awareness, underscores the need to address these barriers for better device utilization and enhanced quality of life for visually impaired individuals. Keywords: blindness; vision aids; visual impairment