Background Visual problems are an under-reported sequela following stroke. The aim of this study is to report annual incidence and point prevalence of visual problems in an acute adult stroke population and to explore feasibility of early timing of visual assessment. Methods and findings Multi-centre acute stroke unit, prospective, epidemiology study (1 st July 2014 to 30 th June 2015). Orthoptists reviewed all patients with assessment of visual acuity, visual fields, ocular alignment, ocular motility, visual inattention and visual perception. 1033 patients underwent visual screening at a median of 3 days (IQR 2) and full visual assessment at a median of 4 days (IQR 7) after the incident stroke: 52% men, 48% women, mean age 73 years and 87% ischaemic strokes. Excluding pre-existent eye problems, the incidence of new onset visual sequelae was 48% for all stroke admissions and 60% in stroke survivors. Three quarters 752/1033 (73%) had visual problems (point prevalence): 56% with impaired central vision, 40% eye movement abnormalities, 28% visual field loss, 27% visual inattention, 5% visual perceptual disorders. 281/1033 (27%) had normal eye exams. Conclusions Incidence and point prevalence of visual problems in acute stroke is alarmingly high, affecting over half the survivors. For most, visual screening and full visual assessment was achieved within about 5 days of stroke onset. Crucial information can thus be provided on visual status and its functional significance to the stroke team, patients and carers, enabling early intervention.

No abstract

There is currently no standardised visual screening tool which can accurately assess all potential post-stroke visual impairments. The current tools screen for only a number of potential stroke-related impairments, which means many visual defects may be missed. The sensitivity of those which screen for all impairments is significantly lowered when patients are unable to report their visual symptoms. Future research is required to develop a tool capable of assessing stroke patients which encompasses all potential visual deficits and can also be easily performed by both the patients and administered by health care professionals in order to ensure all stroke survivors with visual impairment are accurately identified and managed. Implications for Rehabilitation Over 65% of stroke survivors will suffer from a visual impairment, whereas 45% of stroke units do not assess vision. Visual impairment significantly reduces the quality of life, such as being unable to return to work, driving and depression. This review outlines the available screening methods to accurately identify stroke survivors with visual impairments. Identifying visual impairment after stroke can aid general rehabilitation and thus, improve the quality of life for these patients.

AimTo provide a systematic overview of interventions for stroke related visual impairments.MethodA systematic review of the literature was conducted including randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies, systematic reviews, and retrospective medical note reviews. All languages were included and translation obtained. This review covers adult participants (aged 18 years or over) diagnosed with a visual impairment as a direct cause of a stroke. Studies which included mixed populations were included if over 50% of the participants had a diagnosis of stroke and were discussed separately. We searched scholarly online resources and hand searched articles and registers of published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. Search terms included a variety of MESH terms and alternatives in relation to stroke and visual conditions. Article selection was performed by two authors independently. Data were extracted by one author and verified by a second. The quality of the evidence and risk of bias was assessed using appropriate tools dependant on the type of article.ResultsForty‐nine articles (4142 subjects) were included in the review, including an overview of four Cochrane systematic reviews. Interventions appraised included those for visual field loss, ocular motility deficits, reduced central vision, and visual perceptual deficits.ConclusionFurther high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine the effectiveness of interventions for treating post‐stroke visual impairments. For interventions which are used in practice but do not yet have an evidence base in the literature, it is imperative that these treatments be addressed and evaluated in future studies.

This work was carried out in collaboration between both authors. Author LRH ran searches, identified relevant studies, acted as first review author, extracted data, entered data, provided content expertise and co-wrote the final drafts. Author FJR led this review, provided methodological expertise, acted as a second review author. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.