Bittner Ava K, Yoshinaga Patrick D, Kaminski John E
Department of Ophthalmology, University of California Los Angeles, Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Southern California College of Optometry, Marshall B. Ketchum University, Fullerton, CA, USA.
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2025 Feb;20(2):298-303. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2024.2384512. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
We determined over-the-counter magnifier usage rates by patients who newly presented for vision rehabilitation services, and sought to elucidate whether patients' ratings of over-the-counter magnifiers were associated with vision rehabilitation management strategies.
Retrospective records reviews of 274 new vision rehabilitation patients seen between 2021-2023 were completed by three optometric providers at an ophthalmic academic center, college of optometry, and private practice.
Over half (58%) of patients tried an over-the-counter magnifier. Older age was significantly associated with trying over-the-counter magnifiers (OR:1.04; < 0.001). Patients who tried an over-the-counter magnifier had significantly greater odds of the provider recommending and/or dispensing a prescribed hand-held optical illuminated magnifier (< =0.04) or recommending a CCTV electronic magnifier ( = 0.049). The majority indicated over-the-counter magnifiers were somewhat (46%) or not helpful (38%). There was a significantly greater odds of rating the over-the-counter magnifier as not helpful when the provider subsequently recommended a CCTV (OR:4.8; = 0.01) or higher spectacle-based near add power (OR: 2.0; = 0.02).
Since most new patients were unsatisfied with over-the-counter magnifiers, it is encouraging that previous over-the-counter magnifier use often led to upgrades with hand-held optical illuminated magnifiers prescribed by vision rehabilitation providers, or patients were transitioned to CCTV electronic magnifiers or spectacle-based high add powers for near reading. These findings support that older adults who have previously experienced that over-the-counter magnifiers were either helpful or unhelpful are ideal candidates to receive vision rehabilitation by optometric providers who can transition them to a prescribed magnification device to better support their visual functioning needs for near reading.
我们确定了首次前来接受视力康复服务的患者使用非处方放大镜的比例,并试图阐明患者对非处方放大镜的评价是否与视力康复管理策略相关。
眼科学术中心、验光学院和私人诊所的三名验光师对2021年至2023年间就诊的274名新视力康复患者的记录进行了回顾性审查。
超过半数(58%)的患者试用过非处方放大镜。年龄较大与试用非处方放大镜显著相关(比值比:1.04;P<0.001)。试用过非处方放大镜的患者,验光师推荐和/或配发手持式光学照明放大镜(P<=0.04)或推荐闭路电视电子放大镜(P =0.049)的可能性显著更高。大多数人表示非处方放大镜有些帮助(46%)或没有帮助(38%)。当验光师随后推荐闭路电视(比值比:4.8;P =0.01)或更高的基于眼镜的近附加度数(比值比:2.0;P =0.02)时,将非处方放大镜评为没有帮助的可能性显著更高。
由于大多数新患者对非处方放大镜不满意,令人鼓舞的是,之前使用非处方放大镜往往会升级为视力康复提供者开具的手持式光学照明放大镜,或者患者会转而使用闭路电视电子放大镜或基于眼镜的高附加度数镜片用于近阅读。这些发现支持,那些之前体验过非处方放大镜有帮助或没有帮助的老年人是验光师进行视力康复的理想人选,验光师可以将他们过渡到处方放大设备,以更好地满足他们近阅读的视觉功能需求。