{"title":"弱视患者与视力相关的生活质量、光反射和光学康复。","authors":"Mette Kjøbæk Gundestrup Andersen, Joaquim Torner Jordana, Hanne Nielsen, Svend Gundestrup, Line Kessel","doi":"10.1097/OPX.0000000000002143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Significance: </strong>We report on photoaversion and patient-reported quality of life in Danish patients with achromatopsia and evaluate the best optical rehabilitation. Our results contribute to the evaluation of outcome measures in therapy trials and aid in providing the best optical rehabilitation for patients with this and clinically similar conditions.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the vision-related quality of life, the impact of photoaversion on daily living, and the best optical rehabilitation in a cohort of achromatopsia patients, including testing the hypothesis that red light-attenuating filters are generally preferred.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with genetically verified achromatopsia were recruited. Investigations included the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire and supplementary questions regarding photoaversion and visual aids. Patients were evaluated by a low vision optometrist and given the choice between different light-attenuating filters. First, two specially designed red and gray filters both transmitting 6% light, and then a pre-defined broader selection of filters. Best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured without filters and with the two trial filters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven patients participated. Median 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire composite score was 73, with the lowest median score in the subscale near vision (58) and the highest in ocular pain (100). The majority of patients (88%) reported that light caused them discomfort, and 92% used aid(s) to reduce light. Ninety-six percent (26 of 27) preferred the gray filter to the red indoors; 74% (20 of 27) preferred the gray filter. Contrast sensitivity was significantly better with the gray filter compared with no filter (p=0.003) and the red filter (p=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our cohort has a relatively high vision-related quality of life compared with other inherited retinal diseases, but photoaversion has a large impact on visual function. Despite what could be expected from a theoretical point of view, red filters are not generally preferred.</p>","PeriodicalId":19649,"journal":{"name":"Optometry and Vision Science","volume":" ","pages":"336-341"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vision-related quality of life, photoaversion, and optical rehabilitation in achromatopsia.\",\"authors\":\"Mette Kjøbæk Gundestrup Andersen, Joaquim Torner Jordana, Hanne Nielsen, Svend Gundestrup, Line Kessel\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/OPX.0000000000002143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Significance: </strong>We report on photoaversion and patient-reported quality of life in Danish patients with achromatopsia and evaluate the best optical rehabilitation. Our results contribute to the evaluation of outcome measures in therapy trials and aid in providing the best optical rehabilitation for patients with this and clinically similar conditions.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the vision-related quality of life, the impact of photoaversion on daily living, and the best optical rehabilitation in a cohort of achromatopsia patients, including testing the hypothesis that red light-attenuating filters are generally preferred.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with genetically verified achromatopsia were recruited. Investigations included the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire and supplementary questions regarding photoaversion and visual aids. Patients were evaluated by a low vision optometrist and given the choice between different light-attenuating filters. First, two specially designed red and gray filters both transmitting 6% light, and then a pre-defined broader selection of filters. Best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured without filters and with the two trial filters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven patients participated. Median 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire composite score was 73, with the lowest median score in the subscale near vision (58) and the highest in ocular pain (100). The majority of patients (88%) reported that light caused them discomfort, and 92% used aid(s) to reduce light. Ninety-six percent (26 of 27) preferred the gray filter to the red indoors; 74% (20 of 27) preferred the gray filter. Contrast sensitivity was significantly better with the gray filter compared with no filter (p=0.003) and the red filter (p=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our cohort has a relatively high vision-related quality of life compared with other inherited retinal diseases, but photoaversion has a large impact on visual function. Despite what could be expected from a theoretical point of view, red filters are not generally preferred.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19649,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Optometry and Vision Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"336-341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Optometry and Vision Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000002143\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Optometry and Vision Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000002143","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Vision-related quality of life, photoaversion, and optical rehabilitation in achromatopsia.
Significance: We report on photoaversion and patient-reported quality of life in Danish patients with achromatopsia and evaluate the best optical rehabilitation. Our results contribute to the evaluation of outcome measures in therapy trials and aid in providing the best optical rehabilitation for patients with this and clinically similar conditions.
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the vision-related quality of life, the impact of photoaversion on daily living, and the best optical rehabilitation in a cohort of achromatopsia patients, including testing the hypothesis that red light-attenuating filters are generally preferred.
Methods: Patients with genetically verified achromatopsia were recruited. Investigations included the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire and supplementary questions regarding photoaversion and visual aids. Patients were evaluated by a low vision optometrist and given the choice between different light-attenuating filters. First, two specially designed red and gray filters both transmitting 6% light, and then a pre-defined broader selection of filters. Best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured without filters and with the two trial filters.
Results: Twenty-seven patients participated. Median 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire composite score was 73, with the lowest median score in the subscale near vision (58) and the highest in ocular pain (100). The majority of patients (88%) reported that light caused them discomfort, and 92% used aid(s) to reduce light. Ninety-six percent (26 of 27) preferred the gray filter to the red indoors; 74% (20 of 27) preferred the gray filter. Contrast sensitivity was significantly better with the gray filter compared with no filter (p=0.003) and the red filter (p=0.002).
Conclusions: Our cohort has a relatively high vision-related quality of life compared with other inherited retinal diseases, but photoaversion has a large impact on visual function. Despite what could be expected from a theoretical point of view, red filters are not generally preferred.
期刊介绍：
Optometry and Vision Science is the monthly peer-reviewed scientific publication of the American Academy of Optometry, publishing original research since 1924. Optometry and Vision Science is an internationally recognized source for education and information on current discoveries in optometry, physiological optics, vision science, and related fields. The journal considers original contributions that advance clinical practice, vision science, and public health. Authors should remember that the journal reaches readers worldwide and their submissions should be relevant and of interest to a broad audience. Topical priorities include, but are not limited to: clinical and laboratory research, evidence-based reviews, contact lenses, ocular growth and refractive error development, eye movements, visual function and perception, biology of the eye and ocular disease, epidemiology and public health, biomedical optics and instrumentation, novel and important clinical observations and treatments, and optometric education.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
