May 2007
Volume 48, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2007
Visual Impact of a Reconfigurable Low Vision Aids Based on Visual Multiplexing
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • F. Vargas-Martin
    Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Departamento de Fí­sica,
  • M. Peláez-Coca
    Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Departamento de Fí­sica,
  • P. Sobrado-Calvo
    Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Departamento de Oftalmología,
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships F. Vargas-Martin, Universidad de Murcia, P; M. Peláez-Coca, None; P. Sobrado-Calvo, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support Grant FIS-PI021829 HIGHWIRE EXLINK_ID="48:5:3566:1" VALUE="PI021829" TYPEGUESS="GEN" /HIGHWIRE from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo, Spain
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2007, Vol.48, 3566. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      F. Vargas-Martin, M. Peláez-Coca, P. Sobrado-Calvo; Visual Impact of a Reconfigurable Low Vision Aids Based on Visual Multiplexing. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):3566.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

To evaluate the impact of an optoelectronic visual aid prototype (Spanish acronym SERBA) on the visual capabilities of low vision patients. This versatile aid achieves real-time video processing with low cost portable systems. It is based on reconfigurable hardware which makes it easily adaptable to different pathologies (that require diverse processing tasks) and also to the pathology evolution.Inspired in the Visual Multiplexing context [Peli 2001, Optom Vision Sci,78:304], it should not compromise the residual vision, and at the same time restore the loss in visual field (VF) or acuity (VA).


We have measured VA (EDTRS), VF (Kinetic perimetry), and contrast sensitivity (CSV-1000E) while using the SERBA, in simulated and real patients suffering from either tunnel vision or VA loss.In the case of tunnel vision, subjects also walked through an obstacle route with and without aid to evaluate their obstacle avoidance capabilites, and they stated their opinion about the aid by questionnaire filling.


The residual VA and VF was not affected, while contrast sensitivity was only slightly reduced in real patients. The enhanced VA and VF were increased up to the device limits (typically AV=1, and 3-4 times VF expansion)Even though objective differences in mobility and obstacle avoidance were not significant, questionnaire results showed preference for the aids and a positive evaluation of its usefulness.


The proposed aid does not compromise the residual field, while enhancement of visual performance is achieved in both VF and VA loss.In the case of mobility, patients showed preference for the aid, even further adaptation is required  

Keywords: low vision • visual fields • quality of life 

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.