Kevin E. Houston

Patching for Diplopia Contraindicated in Patients with Brain Injury

PURPOSE Patching for double vision is a common palliative treatment for head-trauma patients with acquired strabismus when prisms are not feasible. METHODS We review literature on spatial neglect and discuss possible effects of monocular occlusion on spatial attention. RESULTS Patching the left eye has been shown to worsen spatial judgments in some brain-injured patients with left neglect by inhibiting the right superior colliculus further impairing contralateral leftward orienting (the Sprague Effect). CONCLUSIONS Because more peripheral parts of the visual field increasingly project to the contralateral superior colliculus with the temporal crescent being entirely contralateral, avoiding patching of the temporal crescent was advised, and in most cases can be achieved by taping off the spectacle lens and avoiding an elastic eye patch.

Restoration of vision after brain injury using magnet glasses

Visual impairments are common after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and negatively affect quality of life. We describe a 39-year-old woman with a severe TBI who was evaluated by the inpatient optometry and vision rehabilitation service with findings of complete right homonymous hemianopia and right cranial nerve III palsy with 30-degree right exotropia (eye turn out) and complete right ptosis (eyelid will not open). The 30-degree exotropia advantageously generated 30 degrees of right visual field expansion when the right ptosis was treated with a magnetic levator prosthesis, which restores eyelid opening. Once opened, the patient used visual field expansion derived from a right exotropia to overcome functional impairments caused by right hemianopia. Field expansion improved the patients wheelchair mobility and reaching tasks during inpatient therapy. This is the first report of visual field expansion by strabismus facilitated by correction of ptosis. Strabismus should be considered for its potential field expansion benefits when homonymous visual deficits are present, before considering patching. A multidisciplinary vision rehabilitation team is well suited to make this determination.

The Magnetic Levator Prosthesis for Temporary Management of Severe Blepharoptosis: Initial Safety and Efficacy

Purpose We further optimized and evaluated the safety of the magnetic levator prosthesis (MLP) for temporary management of severe blepharoptosis, and compared efficacy and comfort against the ptosis crutch. Methods The interpalpebral fissure (IPF) of participants (n = 12) with ptosis was measured during attempted eyelid opening, volitional closing, and spontaneous closing with no device, ptosis crutch, or the MLP. A 10-point scale documented comfort. Additionally, a 20 minute and then 1 week trial of the MLP was offered. Safety measures were skin erythema rating, change in visual acuity, and change in corneal staining. Results The MLP and crutch opened the eye (IPF 11.2 and 9.3 mm), but the MLP allowed better volitional closure (IPF 1.0 vs. 4.9 mm, P = 0.009), but was no better in allowing spontaneous blink (IPF 7.5 vs. 7.7 mm, P = 0.722). Both devices were equally comfortable (both median 8/10 comfort, P = 0.46). With extended use, opening with the MLP showed IPF 9.24 mm at 20 minutes and 9.46 mm at 1 week, and volitional closure was IPF 0.95 and 0.52 mm, respectively. Closure on spontaneous blink improved with extended wear to IPF 5.14 and 5.18 mm, respectively (P = 0.002). Two participants exhibited moderate skin erythema and one had increased corneal staining without change in acuity. Conclusions The MLP is safe and feasible for temporary correction of severe ptosis. Translational Relevance First group data in patients showing successful reanimation of the eyelid with magnetic force.

A Pilot Study of Perceptual-Motor Training for Peripheral Prisms

Purpose Peripheral prisms (p-prisms) shift peripheral portions of the visual field of one eye, providing visual field expansion for patients with hemianopia. However, patients rarely show adaption to the shift, incorrectly localizing objects viewed within the p-prisms. A pilot evaluation of a novel computerized perceptual-motor training program aiming to promote p-prism adaption was conducted. Methods Thirteen patients with hemianopia fitted with 57Δ oblique p-prisms completed the training protocol. They attended six 1-hour visits reaching and touching peripheral checkerboard stimuli presented over videos of driving scenes while fixating a central target. Performance was measured at each visit and after 3 months. Results There was a significant reduction in touch error (P = 0.01) for p-prism zone stimuli from pretraining median of 16.6° (IQR 12.1°–19.6°) to 2.7° ( IQR 1.0°–8.5°) at the end of training. P-prism zone reaction times did not change significantly with training (P > 0.05). P-prism zone detection improved significantly (P = 0.01) from a pretraining median 70% (IQR 50%–88%) to 95% at the end of training (IQR 73%–98%). Three months after training improvements had regressed but performance was still better than pretraining. Conclusions Improved pointing accuracy for stimuli detected in prism-expanded vision of patients with hemianopia wearing 57Δ oblique p-prisms is possible and training appears to further improve detection. Translational Relevance This is the first use of this novel software to train adaptation of visual direction in patients with hemianopia wearing peripheral prisms.

Driving With Hemianopia VI: Peripheral Prisms and Perceptual-Motor Training Improve Detection in a Driving Simulator

Purpose Drivers with homonymous hemianopia (HH) were previously found to have impaired detection of blind-side hazards, yet in many jurisdictions they may obtain a license. We evaluated whether oblique 57Δ peripheral prisms (p-prisms) and perceptual-motor training improved blind-side detection rates. Methods Patients with HH (n = 11) wore p-prisms for 2 weeks and then received perceptual-motor training (six visits) detecting and touching stimuli in the prism-expanded vision. In a driving simulator, patients drove and pressed the horn upon detection of pedestrians who ran toward the roadway (26 from each side): (1) without p-prisms at baseline; (2) with p-prisms after 2 weeks acclimation but before training; (3) with p-prisms after training; and (4) 3 months later. Results P-prisms improved blind-side detection from 42% to 56%, which further improved after training to 72% (all P < 0.001). Blind-side timely responses (adequate time to have stopped) improved from 31% without to 44% with p-prisms (P < 0.001) and further improved with training to 55% (P = 0.02). At the 3-month follow-up, improvements from training were maintained for detection (65%; P = 0.02) but not timely responses (P = 0.725). There was wide between-subject variability in baseline detection performance and response to p-prisms. There were no negative effects of p-prisms on vehicle control or seeing-side performance. Conclusions P-prisms improved detection with no negative effects, and training may provide additional benefit. Translational Relevance In jurisdictions where people with HH are legally driving, these data aid in clinical decision making by providing evidence that p-prisms improve performance without negative effects.