VeRSE: Vertical Reading Strategy Efficacy for Homonymous Hemianopia after Stroke: A Feasibility Study.
Hemianopic dyslexia
Homonymous hemianopia
Stroke
Vertical reading
Visual field loss
Journal
The British and Irish orthoptic journal
ISSN: 1743-9868
Titre abrégé: Br Ir Orthopt J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101233819
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Mar 2019
15 Mar 2019
Historique:
entrez:
1
10
2020
pubmed:
15
3
2019
medline:
15
3
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To conduct a feasibility study using vertical reading for stroke survivors with homonymous hemianopia. Feasibility objectives included assessing the appropriateness of testing methods, outcomes and amount of recruitment possible. Vertical reading has yet no empirical evidence for its use in homonymous hemianopia. A cross-over design was used involving stroke survivors with homonymous hemianopia. Three reading directions (horizontal; 90° clockwise rotation; 90° anti-clockwise rotation) were assessed in a randomised order whilst measuring reading speed. Seven participants with stroke-induced homonymous hemianopia were recruited (25.9% recruitment rate). The mean horizontal reading speed was 120.3 (SD 33.9) words per minute. When reading vertically (downwards) at 90° clockwise rotation the mean reading speed was 62.7 (SD 43.4) words per minute. When reading vertically (upwards) at 90° anti-clockwise rotation the mean reading speed was 74.6 (SD 53.5) words per minute. This feasibility study has informed and provided vital information for planning and developing future studies for vertical reading. The primary outcome measure for future studies should be reading acuity, taking account of both speed and errors. Further preliminary studies are required which incorporate a practice element to assess for any improvement over time.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32999972
doi: 10.22599/bioj.128
pmc: PMC7510401
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
28-35Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s).
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
Références
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2002 Jun;240(6):461-7
pubmed: 12107513
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2000 Jun;68(6):691-706
pubmed: 10811691
Neurology. 2007 May 29;68(22):1922-30
pubmed: 17536049
J Neurol. 2012 Dec;259(12):2611-5
pubmed: 22688568
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010 Sep;24(7):666-73
pubmed: 20810740
Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra. 2011 Jan;1(1):409-17
pubmed: 22187548
Brain. 1995 Aug;118 ( Pt 4):891-912
pubmed: 7655887
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010 Jun;248(6):863-75
pubmed: 20157824
Brain. 2012 Mar;135(Pt 3):912-21
pubmed: 22307201
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1998 Feb;236(2):91-102
pubmed: 9498119
J Exp Child Psychol. 1986 Apr;41(2):211-36
pubmed: 3701249
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2007 Dec;245(12):1749-58
pubmed: 17653566
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:719096
pubmed: 24089687
Neuropsychologia. 2008 Aug;46(10):2445-62
pubmed: 18533203
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Jun;50(6):2765-76
pubmed: 19117930
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Jan;47(2):546-55
pubmed: 18983860
J Neuroophthalmol. 2010 Mar;30(1):73-84
pubmed: 20182214
Brain. 2005 Dec;128(Pt 12):2830-42
pubmed: 16219672
J Vis. 2010 Feb 23;10(2):21.1-17
pubmed: 20462322
ISRN Psychiatry. 2012 Jun 25;2012:686425
pubmed: 23738208
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2012 May;74(4):634-40
pubmed: 22361955
Brain. 2006 Jan;129(Pt 1):158-67
pubmed: 16317018
Lancet. 2003 Mar 29;361(9363):1138
pubmed: 12672352
J Neuroophthalmol. 2005 Jun;25(2):136-42
pubmed: 15937440
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004 Jan;242(1):31-9
pubmed: 14666372
Int J Stroke. 2011 Oct;6(5):404-11
pubmed: 21609413
Brain Lang. 1981 Sep;14(1):174-80
pubmed: 7272722
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Feb;27(2):133-41
pubmed: 22961263
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Mar;89(3):441-8
pubmed: 18295621
J Neuroophthalmol. 2005 Jun;25(2):143-9
pubmed: 15937441
J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Sep;17(9):1442-52
pubmed: 16197697
Can J Exp Psychol. 2005 Sep;59(3):209-17
pubmed: 16248500
Nat Rev Neurol. 2009 Aug;5(8):427-37
pubmed: 19581901