June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Low vision and work opportunities
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jørn Kalleberg
    NAV Buskerud, Drammen, Norway
  • Irene Langeggen
    Buskerud University College, Kongsberg, Norway
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Jørn Kalleberg, None; Irene Langeggen, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 2780. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jørn Kalleberg, Irene Langeggen; Low vision and work opportunities. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):2780.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: The aim is to enhance routines around any working low vision patients enrolled at The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Association, Low vision clinic (NLW-LWC) and Kongberg community, Buskerud, Norway. Data published by the Norwegian Blind Association reports 25-40 % of visual impaired are working. There is no literature referring to the role of NLW-LWC and community cooperation to enhance low vision rehabilitation for these patients.

Methods: Patients were recruited from a list of candidates given by either the Kongsberg Community optometrist or the NLW-LWC optometrist. The patients included were all eligible to low vision aids according to Norwegian guidelines. All participants were asked and signed the consent form.The interview of the subjects was based on a questionnaire concerning general health, mobility, work situation, use of visual aids and their experience with visual rehabilitation.

Results: Age ranged from 32 - 59 years. Of 13 participants, six males and four females were interviewed. One of the subjects had a congenital low vision condition. All subjects have completed education at a high school level. One has a master degree. There is no one working in health care profession. Eight of ten works daily on a computer, but only one uses Zoomtext. Visual acuity ranged from 0,15 - 1,2 (Snellen). Visual field was reduced in nine of ten subjects. Six of ten used filter spectacles. Magnifier (4), near and reading magnifying spectacles (7) and the computer (7) were the prefered low vision aids. Seven subjects have a full time position. Neither had experienced a systematic approach to their low vision situation. Follow ups where through the local optometrist (7/10). They thought highly of the questionnaire and emphasized the need for regular follow up of optometrists with low vision advices as a health speciality.

Conclusions: To enhance better low vison rehabilitation and to provide better work situationsis it necessary to look at the work and the home situation together. There is a need for a systematic approach towards this patient group. The optometrist is essential in optical low vision follow up, the NLW-LWC needs to focus on technical support, illumination, legal rights and the dialog with the work place. Our questionnaire can be a tool of care. To improve the rehabilitation at work you improve selfesteem and paricipation in the society.

Keywords: 584 low vision  

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.