Vision Restoration Therapy Might Improve Sight for Trauma, Stroke Victims (Health Scout)

[ODwire.org NewsBot]

Vision Restoration Therapy Might Improve Sight for Trauma, Stroke Victims (Health Scout)

Published: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:16:59 GMT

FRIDAY, Aug. 17 (HealthDay News) -- Vision restoration therapy (VRT) helps increase vision-related brain activity in patients who are partially blind because of a severe stroke or traumatic brain injury, a Columbia University Medical Center study finds.

Read More...

 

[W. Jarrod Long]

Any ODwire members doing VRT?

I would like to hear from anyone using VRT in their practice. Have your patients noticed any subjective benefits? Thanks!

 

[Todd B. La Point O.D.]

I had just one patient that took it upon himself to get to a center, I believe in Minnesota. I prescribed glasses at the suggested focal length and did the follow up fields.

The patient worked hard at it yet had no improvement. Our flagship, Washington University, in St. Louis doesn't think much of it and therefore is not or has no plans to be a coordinating center. As you can see many reputable programs back VRT, but I think if you go digging you'll find more that have elected not to participate.

I'm sure its a bit of a money maker, but unless the patients notice subjective improvement, (i.e. improves the quality of life) the statistical significance is nullified, making the patient perhaps have a "buyers remorse" type of feeling.

That's not what I want in my patients.

Good luck.

 

[W. Jarrod Long]

Thanks!

Thanks Todd,

That was a very helpful response. It costs the doctor a lot to administer so we have to charge the patient even MORE to make it worthwhile for us to do. Then, to not have a very good success rate??? I'm not getting on board.

The idea is intriguing, but I'll wait.

 

[Merrill Bowan]

Discussed heaviy in CE this weekend

Just back from hearing Mike Earley (PhD, OSU) discuss the "Neurology of Vision: from V1 to Consciousness." The NovaVision Vision Restoration Therapy (VRT) was heavily discussed.

Mike showed a chart of data (which used foveal "tagging") that does not support their method: of 34 eyes treated, only ONE eye changed more than 1 SD -- and that JUST BARELY. (The fixation spot of VRT is dependent on voluntary directional control training, but when the fovea was tagged to allow the patient to actially identify it, the above results were obtained. The indications are that they are teaching the patients off-center fixation). They claim a 10 degree improvement, but the fields and graphic illustration on their site shows far, FAR more than that. Deception.

As to QOL changes, there was no pretreatment survey taken: how can you remember 6 months later how bad something was? (My oldest daughter just had her first baby 4 weeks ago, C-Section, and she's already talking about the next baby!)

VRT is "marketing to the hopeless" in its worst form.....government-approved!

Laetrile, anyone?

 

[W. Jarrod Long]

trash

Thank you also Merrill for the most recent update!
I just threw all of their marketing info in the trash and deleted the emails they had sent. Good move apparently...

 

[Scott Caughell]

I know the LV docs at IU don't think it helps at all.