Table 3. Participants’ observations of the benefit of the intervention
Responses to the questions – What difference has the treatment made to you?
What did you like about the Occupational Therapy; What did you not like?
Benefit rating / 10
‘The treatment has made me more aware of my disability and has provided me with ideas of how to overcome tasks that have been difficult.’ Found all the strategies helpful and still adopts them, but activities did not stretch him enough.
‘I need to scan using my eyes when completing a task.’
‘Now I make an effort when talking to my wife when she is sitting on my right side.’
Liked: Reading, being timed to find keys, scanning in the workshop
Not liked: scanning the room, participant felt this was a memory test and his memory was too good. The search tasks were not challenging enough.
‘I pay attention more to the left side, although I still have visual problems.’
Liked: Scanning exercises for eyes; Not liked: None
‘A great help getting me to understand the limitations that I did not realise I had. I thought when I was coming out of hospital I was fine, thought I could do everyday things. It made me realise how badly it has affected me.’
[Giving an example regarding safety in the kitchen, when using a knife]: ‘I am turning my head to look at the tomato to get the right thickness. I find it easier to hold the tomato, missing my finger and thumb. It has made me safer.’
No likes or dislikes reported in responses
‘Helped to find objects, previously I couldn’t find objects even if they were right in front of me.’ ‘I can get my own meals now.’
Liked: Out walking in the community, finding objects; Not liked: None
‘I can look for things and turn my head more. My head is more central. I can do cleaning. I can look out of the window and see my family arriving; watch TV and Olympic sports, world affairs. I still struggle with the phone.’
Liked: Finding the paper bits is helpful. Picking up paper bits from floor with the hoover, picked out my clothes in the morning, put on my cream and a bit of perfume. Everything was helpful.
Not liked: none
I’ have been put back on the map again. I was lifted, given another chance; I feel as if I’ve improved since the OT has been going on’
Liked: All helpful; Not liked: None
No rating given
‘I am far more aware of scanning, and it has made a difference for me doing everyday tasks. Easier to find things now. I have improved considerably. ‘
Liked: She used a lot of pressure at looking at her – eye contact, putting things out of my sight on my side. I liked doing the cutlery drawer, putting things back and turning head to look for items
Not liked: When I wanted to do it one way and S wanted to do it another way – the way I do things is different. I understand why it was like this but having to learn new ways of doing things is difficult.
‘I feel more confident each time I go out.’; ‘I have not mastered the computer keyboard’
‘I cannot make as much progress in the kitchen as I would like’
Liked: ‘Going to the shop was fun; Not liked: None
VFQ 25 questionnaire items are scored so that a high score represents better functioning * Participant B did not complete VFQ25 post intervention, his composite score before intervention was 83.6. ** Colour is a question that asks participants to rate how much difficulty they have picking out and matching clothes because of eyesight. Participants in this study may have difficulty picking out clothing due to search difficulties rather than due to colour vision. ***Participants responded to questions about activities in distance, peripheral and colour with the option: Stopped doing this for other reasons or not interested in doing this; for example, the peripheral vision item is a question that asks ‘Because of your eyesight, how much difficulty do you have noticing objects off to the side while you are walking along? Participants F & G could not answer this question since they are unable to walk.
Figure 1. Room search and Head worn camera (inset)
A Go-Pro digital head worn video camera secured with an elastic strap (inset). The position of the camera was aligned using a laser pointer to ensure the camera was facing straight ahead when the participant was looking at an object directly in front of them.
The object was hidden in eight sections of the room: left upper, left lower, central left upper, central left lower, central right upper, central right lower, right upper, right lower. A grid drawn later by the tester was used for analysis of the searches.
Figure 2 Participants’ room search performances before and after the intervention
Individual participants are labelled A-I on the x axis of each chart. Dark bars represent scores before intervention, light open bars after intervention. The error bars in Graphs A and B represent mean 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the individual’s before and after intervention conditions. Each of these CIs are based on an average of 162 head-directions (range: 52-266) in Graph A. In Graph B ‘early search’ was defined as the first five head directions in each search and these data are again plotted with mean 95% Cis. These CIs are based on an average of 62 head-directions (range: 46-76). For Graphs C and D median search times plotted. The bars on these graphs represent the inter quartile range (IQR) in each case. Note that these medians and IQRs are based on only 8 observations each and that the trials were timed-out at 120 seconds.