Randomized crossover clinical trial of real and sham peripheral prism glasses for hemianopia.

IMPORTANCE There is a major lack of randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of prismatic treatments for hemianopia. Evidence for their effectiveness is mostly based on anecdotal case reports and open-label evaluations without a control condition. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of real relative to sham peripheral prism glasses for patients with complete homonymous hemianopia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Double-masked, randomized crossover trial at 13 study sites, including the Peli laboratory at Schepens Eye Research Institute, 11 vision rehabilitation clinics in the United States, and 1 in the United Kingdom. Patients were 18 years or older with complete homonymous hemianopia for at least 3 months and without visual neglect or significant cognitive decline. INTERVENTION Patients were allocated by minimization into 2 groups. One group received real (57-prism diopter) oblique and sham (<5-prism diopter) horizontal prisms; the other received real horizontal and sham oblique, in counterbalanced order. Each crossover period was 4 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the overall difference, across the 2 periods of the crossover, between the proportion of participants who wanted to continue with (said yes to) real prisms and the proportion who said yes to sham prisms. The secondary outcome was the difference in perceived mobility improvement between real and sham prisms. RESULTS Of 73 patients randomized, 61 completed the crossover. A significantly higher proportion said yes to real than sham prisms (64% vs 36%; odds ratio, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.8-21.0). Participants who continued wear after 6 months reported greater improvement in mobility with real than sham prisms at crossover end (P = .002); participants who discontinued wear reported no difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Real peripheral prism glasses were more helpful for obstacle avoidance when walking than sham glasses, with no differences between the horizontal and oblique designs. Peripheral prism glasses provide a simple and inexpensive mobility rehabilitation intervention for hemianopia. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00494676.

[1]  Gang Luo,et al.  Evaluation of a prototype Minified Augmented‐View device for patients with impaired night vision * , 2004, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[2]  L. Gauthier,et al.  Evaluation of left visuospatial neglect: Norms and discrimination power of two tests. , 1990 .

[3]  E. Peli OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE Copyright © 2000 American Academy of Optometry ORIGINAL ARTICLE Field Expansion for Homonymous Hemianopia by Optically Induced Peripheral Exotropia , 2022 .

[4]  E. Pfeiffer A Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire for the Assessment of Organic Brain Deficit in Elderly Patients † , 1975, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[5]  Eli Peli,et al.  Driving with hemianopia, I: Detection performance in a driving simulator. , 2009, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science.

[6]  E. Peli,et al.  Clinical and Laboratory Evaluation of Peripheral Prism Glasses for Hemianopia , 2009, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[7]  Hedges Tr,et al.  Fresnel-Prismen - ihr Stellenwert in der Rehabilitation homonymer Hemianopsien , 1988 .

[8]  Timothy McMahon,et al.  Use of prisms for navigation and driving in hemianopic patients , 2005, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[9]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[10]  T. Schenkenberg,et al.  Line bisection and unilateral visual neglect in patients with neurologic impairment , 1980, Neurology.

[11]  M Alan Brookhart,et al.  Meta-analyses involving cross-over trials: methodological issues. , 2011, International journal of epidemiology.

[12]  M. Reding,et al.  Fresnel prisms improve visual perception in stroke patients with homonymous hemianopia or unilateral visual neglect , 1990, Neurology.

[13]  Smith Jl,et al.  Hemianopic Fresnel prisms. , 1982 .

[14]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Meta-analyses involving cross-over trials: methodological issues. , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[15]  R. Massof,et al.  Visual function assessment questionnaires. , 2001, Survey of ophthalmology.

[16]  Konrad Pesudovs,et al.  The Development, Assessment, and Selection of Questionnaires , 2007, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[17]  U. Shahani,et al.  Interventions for visual field defects in patients with stroke. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[18]  E. O'Neill,et al.  Prism Therapy and Visual Rehabilitation in Homonymous Visual Field Loss , 2011, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[19]  D. Gottlieb,et al.  Clinical research and statistical analysis of a visual field awareness system. , 1992, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[20]  T. Mandelman,et al.  Fresnel prism therapy for right hemianopia. , 1983, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[21]  A G Lee,et al.  Improving awareness of peripheral visual field using sectorial prism. , 1999, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[22]  Alex R. Bowers,et al.  A Pilot Evaluation of On-Road Detection Performance by Drivers with Hemianopia Using Oblique Peripheral Prisms , 2012, Stroke research and treatment.

[23]  Ana M. Perez,et al.  The Use of Fresnel and Ophthalmic Prisms with Persons with Hemianopic Visual Field Loss , 2003 .

[24]  Gang Luo,et al.  Collision judgment when using an augmented-vision head-mounted display device. , 2009, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[25]  R. C. Sergott Community-Based Trial of a Peripheral Prism Visual Field Expansion Device for Hemianopia , 2009 .

[26]  Alison R. Lane,et al.  Clinical treatment options for patients with homonymous visual field defects , 2008, Clinical ophthalmology.

[27]  L. Merabet,et al.  Approaches to rehabilitation for visual field defects following brain lesions , 2009, Expert review of medical devices.

[28]  C. Kennard,et al.  Rehabilitation strategies for patients with homonymous visual field defects. , 2005, Journal of neuro-ophthalmology : the official journal of the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society.

[29]  R. Massof,et al.  Perceived visual ability for independent mobility in persons with retinitis pigmentosa. , 1999, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[30]  C. A. Young HOMONYMOUS HEMIANOPSIA DURING PREGNANCY AIDED BY REFLECTING PRISM , 1929 .