Do line guide interventions improve reading in homonymous hemianopias?

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Line guide interventions to improve reading speed and accuracy in patients suffering from residual homonymous hemianopias: a before and after design.

  • IRAS ID

    238225

  • Contact name

    Mary Halter

  • Contact email

    maryhalter@sgul.kingston.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    St George's, University of London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 3 months, 15 days

  • Research summary

    Vision issues following stroke are very common. Homonymous hemianopias (HH) are the most common visual field defect, where half of the vision to the left or right is lost. Most do not recover fully and, in our clinical experience, cause reading problems. Across the UK, treatments to improve reading vary hugely and very little research has been conducted to examine their effects.
    This project focuses on the line guide intervention - an L shaped section of card which isolates a section of text and is moved along the page at reading pace, helping patients to find words which are in their area of lost vision.
    The intervention involves reading two pages of a set text with the line guide (at home) daily for 28 days.
    English speaking adults with residual HH over three months post stroke will be recruited from an acute hospital and its community rehabilitation service.
    Participants will attend pre- and post-intervention appointments.
    Primary aims are to assess for any post-intervention changes in reading ability (CRA) and participant experiences.
    Changes in participant experiences will be determined by comparing pre- and post-intervention survey scores and asking closed questions at the post-intervention assessment.
    The primary outcomes will be recorded twice post-intervention – once for reading with the line guide in place and once for reading with it removed. This will provide some indication of whether the line guide is an exercise which improves unaided reading ability or whether it’s a compensation tool which only improves reading when it’s in use.
    Secondary outcomes will examine associations between
    -the objective (CRA) and subjective (changes in participant experiences) measurements
    -CRA and field defect characteristics and compliance with the intervention (self-reported).
    This will be a small scale, descriptive study to produce early feasibility and indicative data for future studies.

  • REC name

    South Central - Berkshire Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    18/SC/0295

  • Date of REC Opinion

    31 May 2018

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion