A Randomised Controlled Trial of Treatment for Post-Stroke Homonymous Hemianopia: Screening and Recruitment.

The authors report the screening process and recruitment figures for the VISION (Visual Impairment in Stroke; Intervention Or Not) trial. This is a prospective, randomised, single-blinded, three-arm controlled trial in 14 UK acute hospital stroke units. Stroke teams identified stroke survivors suspected as having homonymous hemianopia. Interventions included Fresnel prisms versus visual search training versus standard care (information only). Primary outcome was change in visual field assessment from baseline to 26 weeks. Secondary measures included change in quality-of-life questionnaires. Recruitment opened in May 2011. A total of 1171 patients were screened by the local principal investigators. Of 1171 patients, 178 (15.2%) were eligible for recruitment: 87 patients (7.4%) provided consent and were recruited; 91 patients (7.8%) did not provide consent, and 993 of 1171 patients (84.8%) failed to meet the eligibility criteria. Almost half were excluded due to complete/partial recovery of hemianopia (43.6%; n = 511). The most common ineligibility reason was recovery of hemianopia. When designing future trials in this area, changes in eligibility criteria/outcome selection to allow more patients to be recruited should be considered, e.g., less stringent levels of visual acuity/refractive error. Alternative outcomes measurable in the home environment, rather than requiring hospital attendance for follow-up, could facilitate increased recruitment.

Care provision for poststroke visual impairment.

BACKGROUND: We sought to explore the care provision for poststroke visual impairment and variations in this in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Survey questions were developed and piloted with clinicians, academics, and users. Questions addressed types of visual problems; how these were identified, treated, and followed up; care pathways in use; links with other professions; and referral options. The survey was accessed via a Weblink, which was circulated through UK professional organizations to multiprofessional members of ophthalmic and stroke teams. RESULTS: A total of 548 completed electronic surveys were obtained. In all, 49.5% of respondents represented stroke teams, 42.5% eye teams, and 8% from other teams, for example, emergency care. Many respondents (41%) saw patients within 1 week of stroke. Nineteen percent did not personally test vision: 11% had a visiting clinician to test vision, and 22% used screening tools. Validated tests were used for the assessment of visual acuity (39.5%), visual field (57.5%), eye movement (48.5%), and visual function (58.5%). Visual problems suspected by family or professionals were high (88.5%). Typical overall follow-up period of vision care was less than 3 months. In all, 46% of respondents used designated care pathways for stroke survivors with visual problems; 33.5% of respondents did not provide visual information leaflets. CONCLUSIONS: Significant inequality exists in care for stroke survivors who experience visual problems. There is great variability in how vision screening is undertaken, which vision tests are used, methods of referral to eye care services, how visual problems are managed, and what vision information is provided to stroke survivors/carers. Further work is required to ensure equality and effective care.

Delivery of high quality stroke and vision care: experiences of UK services.

PURPOSE: We sought to identify exemplars of high quality care provision from established stroke vision services. METHODS: We identified areas of high quality services across the UK, judged as having integrated stroke/vision care provision for stroke survivors. Healthcare professionals were selected to participate in 1:1 interviews or focus groups. A strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT) framework was used to lead the discussion in a semi-structured format. Thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Interviewees (n = 24) from 14 NHS Trusts included eye clinic managers, nurses, orthoptists, occupational therapists and physiotherapists. Identified strengths of their services included established communication, training provision for stroke team staff, "open access" for referrals, use of standardised screening/referral forms, provision of lay summaries and information sheets, patients assessed on the stroke unit with continued follow-up and initial visual assessments made within 1 week of stroke onset. Weaknesses included lack of funding, insufficient orthoptic cover, and time consuming retraining of stroke staff because of staff rotation and changes. Opportunities included increasing the number (or length) of orthoptic sessions and training of stroke staff. Perceived threats related to funding and increased appointment waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: Practical elements for improved stroke and vision care provision are highlighted which can be implemented with relatively little financial inputs. Implications for Rehabilitation Integrated vision services within stroke units can improve the detection of visual problems in stroke survivors leading to earlier visual rehabilitation. Orthoptists within core stroke teams are beneficial to the delivery of a high quality service. This study illustrates clear practical elements to support the provision of high quality integrated stroke and vision services. Relatively little financial inputs are required to fund such services but with larger potential to improve patient care.