Visual daily functioning of chronic stroke patients assessed by goal attainment scaling after visual restorative training: an explorative study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine visual training effects on measures of daily life activities in cerebral blindness patients. METHOD: The study design was an explorative pre-post test design of patients in the chronic phase of stroke (≯8 months) with visual field defects. Twelve hemianopic patients were trained by using visual restorative training, which is aimed at reducing the visual field defect. Goal attainment scaling (GAS) was applied to assess whether the functional impact of visual field defects on daily life activities was reduced after defects were reduced. RESULTS: Visual field defect reduction was observed in all 12 patients to varying degrees. GAS score improvements were observed in 9 patients. In 5 of these 9 patients, all goals were attained or over-attained; in 2 of these patients, some goals were attained and other goals were not attained; and in 2 patients, goals were not attained. As a group, patients significantly improved their GAS scores (t test, P <.005). The correlation between GAS and defect reduction was not significant (Pearson's r = 0.37, P ≯ .01). It is likely that this was due to the fact that the set goals were not tuned to the part of the visual field where defect reduction could be expected. This, in turn, may have led to slightly underestimated results. CONCLUSIONS: Visual restorative function training does not only lead to visual field enlargement, as assessed with dynamic Goldmann perimetry, but it may also lead to a subjective improvement of daily visual functioning as evaluated by means of GAS.

Improvement in activities of daily living after visual training in patients with homonymous visual field defects using Goal Attainment Scaling.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is the most common cause of homonymous visual field defects (HVFDs). Yet, there is no standard protocol for composing a rehabilitation program. OBJECTIVE: In this study we assess ADL gain of visual training for vision restoration in HVFD patients by means of Goal Attainment Scaling. METHODS: Thirty-five patients trained two predefined regions of the visual field successively at home. In each region we compared the effects of both training rounds, one of which was thus 'directed' and the other 'undirected'. Visual fields were measured with Humphrey and Goldmann perimetry. QoL was assessed with three stroke-related questionnaires and ADL with Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS). RESULTS: Visual training improved the visual field for both Goldmann (ECSG = 5.82±0.94 mm; p = <0.001; n = 31) and Humphrey (0.79±0.20 dB; p = <0.001; n = 28) perimetry. All standardized stroke questionnaires were significantly improved after training (p < 0.039; n = 29), but showed no significant relation with either type of field improvement (p > 0.359). About 75% of the patients improved on their (personalized) GAS score. Interestingly, after both training rounds the GAS score increased in proportion to the extent of visual field improvement, for Goldmann border shift (p = 0.042; r = 0.38; n = 29) but not for Humphrey sensitivity increase (p = 0.337; r = 0.192; n = 28). Multiple regression revealed that GAS score was linearly related to the directed training component for Humphrey perimetry, but not for undirected training. CONCLUSION: Together these data suggest that (1) visual training aimed at vision restoration leads to visual field improvement and (2) the extent of visual field improvement is linearly related to the improvement of personal activities of daily living as evaluated by means of GAS. In conclusion, a personalized evaluation to assess treatment success showed the clinical significance of a visual training for vision restoration.

Responsiveness of two participation measures in an outpatient rehabilitation setting.

OBJECTIVE: The responsiveness of a new participation measure, the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-Participation) was compared with that of the Impact on Particpation and Autonomy (IPA). Furthermore, the concurrent validity of these two measures was assessed. METHOD: Participants were patients with brain injury or neuromuscular disease, who received occupational therapy as part of a multidisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation programme. They completed the IPA and the USER-Participation at the start and end of the programme, and at three-month follow-up. Responsiveness was analysed using the effect size (ES) and the standardized response mean (SRM). RESULTS: Responsiveness figures were small to moderate (-0.4 to 0.5) and similar for the IPA and the USER-Participation. The USER-Participation showed a consistent result, with Frequency scores declining and Restriction and Satisfaction scores inclining over time, and the IPA showed mixed results, with the different domain scores both inclining and declining over time. Correlations between IPA and USER-Participation scales were all significant, but by far strongest for the USER-Participation Satisfaction scale (-0.64 to -0.81). CONCLUSION: The USER-Participation was at least as responsive as the IPA. Further, satisfaction with participation as measured with the USER-Participation is highly similar to the concept of autonomy in participation as measured with the IPA.