Value of Handheld Optical Illuminated Magnifiers for Sustained Silent Reading by Visually Impaired Adults

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE Vision rehabilitation providers tend to recommend handheld, illuminated optical magnifiers for short-duration spot reading tasks, but this study indicates that they are also a viable option to improve sustained, continuous text reading (e.g., books or magazines), especially for visually impaired adults who read slowly with only spectacle-based near correction. PURPOSE The utility of handheld optical magnifiers for sustained silent reading tasks involving normal-sized continuous text could be a valuable indication that is not recognized by vision rehabilitation providers and patients. METHODS Handheld, illuminated optical magnifiers were dispensed to 29 visually impaired adults who completed the sustained silent reading test by phone at baseline without the new magnifier and 1 month after using the magnifier. Reading speed in words per minute (wpm) was calculated from the time to read each page and then averaged across up to 10 pages or determined for the fastest read page (maximum). RESULTS From baseline without the magnifier to 1 month with the magnifier, there was a significant improvement in mean reading speed by 14 wpm (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6 to 24; P = .02) and for maximum reading speed by 18 wpm (95% CI, 5.4 to 30; P = .005) on average across participants. Participants who had slower baseline reading speeds without the magnifier demonstrated significantly greater improvements in mean and maximum reading speeds on average with the magnifier (95% CI, 8 to 32 [P = .003]; 95% CI, 4 to 36 [P = .02]). A significantly greater number of pages were read with the new magnifier than without it (Wilcoxon z = −2.5; P = .01). A significantly greater number of pages were read with the magnifier by participants who read fewer pages at baseline (95% CI, 0.57 to 5.6; P = .02) or had greater improvements in mean reading speed (95% CI, 0.57 to 5.6; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS Many visually impaired adults read more quickly and/or read a greater number of pages after using a new magnifier for a month than compared to without it. The largest gains occurred among those with more difficulty at baseline, indicating the potential to improve reading rates with magnifiers for those with greater deficits.

Outcomes of Telerehabilitation Versus In-Office Training With Magnification Devices for Low Vision: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…Participants were English-speaking adults aged 18 years or older with any BCVA, ocular disease, and no greater than mild cognitive impairment (on modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Impairment [m-TICS], which was assessed after a new magnifier was prescribed and after enrollment); exclusion criteria were detailed previously. 1 , 13 , 17 Participants were allowed to have previously used a prescribed magnifier (i.e., different type or power; n = 10 or 21% of participants had a previously prescribed magnifier) and/or previously received vision rehabilitation services (34%; n = 16 of 47), but nearly two-thirds of participants (66%) were completely new to these interventions. For the participants who had previously received vision rehabilitation services, four (8.5%) were seen more than 3 years ago and 12 (25.5%) were seen within the past 3 years.…”