Low vision: a regional evaluation of service provision

Abstract

As we move rapidly towards the 21st century epidemiologists predict that within the western world, the number of individuals living into their 7th, 8th, and 9th decades will increase dramatically. The implications for those responsible for the provision of ophthalmic care will be a colossal increase in the incidents of age related degenerative pathology. Those specialising in low vision care will find that as the pool of persons requiring services expands, the financial resources available to provide materials will diminish. Targeting those most likely to benefit from low vision services can only be done when the population profile is fully understood and factors affecting success and failure are evaluated. In this study records for three groups of 50 new low vision patients referred to a regional low vision clinic over a ten year period are evaluated (1 year, 5 years, 10 years). A total of 50 of those supplied with low vision aids were contacted by telephone and a questionnaire was used to determine whether low vision aids had been useful. Information was also gathered on patients' attitudes to the services provided at the clinic and the manor in which they were provided. A total of 52% of patients assessed were female (female 79/male 71). The average age of the population was 65 +/−22 (SD) years (range 15–98). Thirty three percent of patients were registered as blind or partially sighted (blind 21%, partially sighted 11%). The proportion of clinic attendees who were registered increased by almost 12% over the ten year period. Of those attending, 48% had age related macular degeneration, 7% had diabetic retinopathy, 6% had myopic degeneration, 5% had glaucoma and 5% cataracts. A total of 39% of patients attending the clinic were seen within two years of having become visually impaired. The majority of these patients had been on a waiting list for between 4 and 9 months before having attended for a low vision assessment. This figure reflects the demands placed on an under funded regional service. The most popular low vision aids supplied were stand magnifiers (52%) and (of which 77% were internally illuminated), 22% hand magnifiers, 12% were spectacle magnifiers and 4% were spectacle mounted telescopic devices. Only 6% of low vision aids were supplied for distant visual tasks. The majority of those supplied with low vision aids (92%) claimed to have benefited from attending the low vision clinic.