Is the “Preferred” Color Temperature Transferable from Near-Vision to Ambient Home Lighting? An Exploratory Study with People Who Have Central Visual Field Loss

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (6) ◽  
pp. 447-460
Author(s):  
Claude Vincent ◽  
Julie Bourassa ◽  
Nathalie Cimon ◽  
Paule Verville ◽  
Frédéric Dumont

Introduction: The literature supports the importance of adequate lighting for people with visual impairments, but little is known regarding ambient color temperature at home, and the evaluation process is not standardized. Thus, this study aimed to test a method for evaluating the preferred ambient color temperature, established with a near-vision assessment in clinic, and by using standardized tools to evaluate the effects at home for people with central visual field loss. Methods: An exploratory quasi-experimental study was conducted with three interventions and six observation times. A convenience sample of eight women and two men with central visual field loss, aged 64–91 years with visual acuity between 6/21 (20/69) and 6/48 (20/158), was recruited. Two certified low vision therapists realized evaluations with Minnesota Low-Vision Reading Test, International Reading Speed Texts, a Visual Comfort Scale, a Digital Light Meter LX1330B, and Home Environment Lighting Assessment. The LuxIQ and various illuminated magnifiers were used for clinical interventions. Home lighting interventions were individualized and aimed to apply participants’ preferred color temperature in a selected room. Results: The use of the LuxIQ and illuminated magnifiers showed positive effects in near-vision for all participants by increasing reading speed and visual comfort. Home lighting interventions in participants’ kitchen ( n = 4), living room ( n = 4), or office ( n = 2) also had beneficial effects on their visual comfort and ability to perform activities of daily living. The choice of preferred color temperature was transferable from near-vision to ambient lighting for all participants but one and varied widely. Discussion: Innovative preliminary data support the importance of ambient color temperature for people with visual impairments and suggest an efficient standardized evaluation method. Further research is needed to obtain statistically significant empirical evidence in this field. Implications for practitioners: It could be beneficial for low vision therapists to evaluate the individual ambient color temperature preferences of people with visual impairments by using standardized tools.

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
M R Baker ◽  
J Henderson ◽  
A Hill

Anecdotal information from rehabilitation practice of reading performance and low-vision practice suggests that where right homonymous parafoveal field loss impairs reading at the visual-sensory level, an improvement in reading speed can be achieved by inverting the text. This is because whilst left-field loss is considered to impair return eye movements to the beginning of a line, right-field loss is considered to reduce the spatial size of the perceptual window and increase its temporal extent by prolonging fixations times, reducing the amplitudes of saccades to the right, and introducing frequent regressive saccades. Inverting the text was thought to reverse these effects as the leading edge of the perceptual window is ‘returned’ to the sighted field so that in-line saccades can be visually guided. Here we report that this does not appear to be the case. In our study we measured the eye movements of patients with right homonymous hemianopia and others with peripheral loss due to retinitis pigmentosa as well as normal controls using an infrared video eye-tracker. All groups display a similar proportional prolongation of fixations times, reduction of saccadic amplitude, and proportion of regressive saccades when asked to read inverted text, which suggests a cognitive component of impairment independent of visual field loss in right homonymous hemianopes.


2013 ◽  
Vol 131 (6) ◽  
pp. 819
Author(s):  
Ediriweera Desapriya ◽  
D. Sesath Hewapathirane ◽  
Ian Pike

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e0136517 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Matthew Bronstad ◽  
Amanda Albu ◽  
Alex R. Bowers ◽  
Robert Goldstein ◽  
Eli Peli

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document