Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32375800›Full record

Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2020

Visual rehabilitation of patients with corneal diseases.

Michael Oeverhaus, Dirk Dekowski, Herbert Hirche, Joachim Esser, Barbara Schaperdoth-Gerlings, Anja Eckstein

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Telerehabilitation for people with low vision.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. CCPG1 involved in cornealInternational journal of ophthalmology · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael OeverhausDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany. michael.oeverhaus@uk-essen.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0807-7689
Dirk DekowskiDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
Herbert HircheInstitute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Joachim EsserDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
Barbara Schaperdoth-GerlingsDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
Anja EcksteinDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
Essen University Hospital · DEUniversity of Duisburg-Essen · DE

Funding

QD Laser Inc 0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough most patients with visual impairment due to corneal diseases can be treated successfully with surgery, some require visual rehabilitation to restore reading ability. To evaluate the best LVAs especially in terms of reading speed and characterize this specific patient group we performed a prospective, randomized cross-over trial.

methodsAll 34 patients underwent a detailed examination (slit-lamp, funduscopy, SD-OCT, ETDRS) as screening. Only patients with corneal diseases without other ocular diseases were included. Reading-speed was assessed with International-Reading-Speed-Texts (IReST) consecutively with five different LVAs (low vision aids) during one day in a randomized cross-over design. Corneal haze was quantified with corneal densitometry (Pentacam).

resultsPatients were either visually impaired (n = 28), severely impaired (n = 4) or legally blind (n = 2). Patients read significantly faster with LVAs (p < 0.0001). Fastest reading speed could be achieved with video magnifier (CCTV). Optical magnifier and portable-electronic magnifier enabled significantly lower reading speeds (p < 0.01). In a subgroup of patients (VA < 3/60,n = 6) black background enabled patients to read significantly faster compared to white background (p = 0.03).

conclusionPatients with low magnification requirement can be treated successfully with optical LVAs and portable-electronic magnifiers. More severely afflicted patients need a CCTV. Black background enables fastest reading-speeds, probably due to less blinding. Visual impairment can be estimated with corneal densitometry. Our trial confirms the capability of LVAs to successfully restore the reading ability in patients with corneal diseases, which is a crucial part of visual rehabilitation.

trial registrationThis trial was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register as DRKS00010887 at 09.08.2016.

Indexed as

EyeglassesSensory AidsVisual AcuityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCorneal DiseasesCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPersons with Visual DisabilitiesProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesVision, LowCorneal densitometryCorneal diseasesCorneal hazeLow visionLow vision aidsLVAsMagnifier

Identifiers

PMID32375800
PMCPMC7204299
OpenAlexW3023994138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.