IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Originally published In Press as doi:10.1167/iovs.07-1507 on June 14, 2008
(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2008;49:4051-4057.)
© 2008 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
doi:10.1167/iovs.07-1507

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
iovs.07-1507v1
49/9/4051    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmadian, L.
Right arrow Articles by Massof, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmadian, L.
Right arrow Articles by Massof, R.

Does Functional Vision Behave Differently in Low-Vision Patients with Diabetic Retinopathy?—A Case-Matched Study

Lohrasb Ahmadian and Robert Massof

From the Lions Vision Research and Rehabilitation Center, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

PURPOSE. A retrospective case-matched study designed to compare patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) and other ocular diseases, managed in a low-vision clinic, in four different types of functional vision.

METHODS. Reading, mobility, visual motor, and visual information processing were measured in the patients (n = 114) and compared with those in patients with other ocular diseases (n = 114) matched in sex, visual acuity (VA), general health status, and age, using the Activity Inventory as a Rasch-scaled measurement tool. Binocular distance visual acuity was categorized as normal (20/12.5–20/25), near normal (20/32–20/63), moderate (20/80–20/160), severe (20/200–20/400), profound (20/500–20/1000), and total blindness (20/1250 to no light perception). Both Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test and the sign test of matched pairs were used to compare estimated functional vision measures between DR cases and controls.

RESULTS. Cases ranged in age from 19 to 90 years (mean age, 67.5), and 59% were women. The mean visual acuity (logMar scale) was 0.7. Based on the Wilcoxon signed rank test analyses and after adjusting the probability for multiple comparisons, there was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) between patients with DR and control subjects in any of four functional visions. Furthermore, diabetic retinopathy patients did not differ (P > 0.05) from their matched counterparts in goal-level vision-related functional ability and total visual ability.

CONCLUSIONS. Visual impairment in patients with DR appears to be a generic and non–disease-specific outcome that can be explained mainly by the end impact of the disease in the patients’ daily lives and not by the unique disease process that results in the visual impairment.








HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology