Skip to main content
Log in

Homonymous hemianopia: A critical analysis of optical devices, compensatory training, and NovaVision

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Homonymous hemianopia (HH) results from damage to visual pathways posterior to the optic chiasm. Due to the significant functional impairment that can result, rehabilitative techniques and devices intended to improve visual function after HH have been explored and are reviewed here. Two basic treatment strategies include use of optical devices and compensatory training. A third strategy, purported to be based on the principles of neuronal plasticity of the visual cortex, is aimed at visual field recovery by computerized training. This strategy is trade-marked as visual restoration therapy (VRT) by NovaVision (Boca Raton, FL), which began marketing its commercialized therapy program in 2003 for the treatment of visual loss related to stroke and traumatic brain injury. In regard to compensatory training and optical devices, a standardized methodology is lacking, and very few controlled studies exist in regard to efficacy. Outcome data regarding effectiveness of VRT are conflicting, as are the opinions of investigators who have studied and reviewed VRT. There is some evidence that expansion of visual fields by VRT may be the result of very small eye movements. Functional outcomes for each strategy reveal subjective, but limited evidence or no objective evidence of functional improvement; therefore, it is difficult to recommend a specific treatment based on evidence for most patients. The decision to treat and the type of treatment to pursue for patients with HH should be individualized and guided by the type of injury, associated deficits, available resources, and the level of functional impairment manifested by the HH. Consultation with a low-vision specialist (preferably a specialist endorsed by an ophthalmologist or neuro-ophthalmologist) for treatment guidance is recommended.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Pambakian ALM, Kennard C: Can visual function be restored in patients with homonymous hemianopia? Br J Ophthalmol 1997, 81:324–328.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pambakian A, Currie J, Kennard C: Rehabilitation strategies for patients with homonymous visual field defects. J Neuro-ophthalmol 2005, 25:136–142.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zhang X, Kedar S, Lynn MJ, et al.: Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases. Neurology 2006, 66:906–910.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhang X, Kedar S, Lynn MJ, et al.: Natural history of homonymous hemianopia. Neurology 2006, 66:901–905.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gray CS, French JM, Bates D, et al.: Recovery of visual fields in acute stroke: homonymous hemianopia associated with adverse prognosis. Age Ageing 1989, 18:419–421.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Patel AT, Duncan PW, Lai SM, Studenski S: The relation between impairments and functional outcomes poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000, 81:1357–1363.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Duncan P, Zorowitz R, Bates B, et al.: Management of adult stroke rehabilitation care. Stroke 2005, 36:e100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Halligan PW, Marshall JC, Wade DT: Do visual field deficits exacerbate visuo-spatial neglect? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990, 53:487–491.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Parisi JL, Bell RA, Yassein H: Homonymous hemianopic field defects and driving in Canada. Can J Ophthalmol 1991, 26:252–256.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Han L, Law-Gibson D, Reding M: Key neurological impairments influence function-related group outcomes after stroke. Stroke 2002, 33:1920–1924.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Smith-Arena L, Edelstein L, Rabadi MH: Predictors of a successful driver evaluation in stroke patients after discharge based on an acute rehabilitation hospital evaluation. Am J Phys Med 2006, 85:44–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Trauzettel-Klosinski S, Brendler K: Eye movements in reading with hemianopic field defects: the significance of clinical parameters. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1998, 236:91–102.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Zihl J: Visual scanning behavior in patients with homonymous hemianopia. Neuropsychologia 1995, 33:287–303.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rossi PW, Kheyfets S, Reding MJ: Fresnel prisms improve visual perception in stroke patients with homonymous hemianopia or unilateral visual neglect. Neurology 1990, 40:1597–1599.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Peli E: Field expansion for homonymous hemianopia by optically induced peripheral exotropia. Optom Vis Sci 2000, 77:453–464.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Peli E: Vision multiplexing: an engineering approach to vision rehabilitation device development. Optom Vis Sci 2001, 78:304–315.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Pambakian ALM, Mannan SK, Hodgson TL, Kennard C: Saccadic visual search training: a treatment for patients with homonymous hemianopia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004, 75:1443–1448.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Meienberg O, Sangemeister EH, Rosenberg M, et al.: Saccadic eye movement strategies in patients with homonymous hemianopia. Ann Neurol 1981, 9:537–544.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Barton JJS, Black SE: Line bisection in hemianopia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998, 64:660–662.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kerkhoff G, Münbinger U, Haaf E, et al.: Rehabilitation of homonymous scotomata in patients with postgeniculate damage of the visual system: saccadic compensation training. Restor Neurol Neurosci 1992, 4:245–254.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nelles G, Esser J, Eckstein A, et al.: Compensatory visual field training for patients with hemianopia after stroke. Neurosci Lett 2001, 306:189–192.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kerkhoff G, Munssinger U, Meier EK: Neurovisual rehabilitation in cerebral blindness. Arch Neurol 1994, 51:474–481.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kasten E, Wust S, Behrens-Baumann W, Sabel BA: Computer-based training for the treatment of partial blindness. Nat Med 1998, 4:1083–1087.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Varano M, Scassa C: Scanning laser ophthalmoscope microperimetry. Semin Ophthalmol 1998, 13:203–209.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Reinhard J, Schreiber A, Schiefer U, et al.: Does visual restitution training change absolute homonymous visual field defects? A fundus controlled study. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89:30–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Schreiber A, Vonthein R, Reinhard J, et al.: Effect of visual restitution training on absolute homonymous scotomas. Neurology 2006, 67:143–145.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sabel A, Kenkel S, Kasten E: Vision restoration therapy (VRT) efficacy as assessed by comparative perimetric analysis and subjective questionnaires. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004, 22:399–420.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mueller I, Poggel D, Kenkel S, et al.: Vision restoration therapy after brain damage: subjective improvements of activities of daily life and their relationship to visual field enlargements. Vis Impair Res 2003, 5:157–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Horton JC: Disappointing results from Nova Vision’s visual restoration therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89:1–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Horton JC: Visual restoration therapy: confounded by eye movements. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89:792–794.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Sabel BA, Kenkel S, Kasten E: Visual restoration therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89:522–524.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sabel BA: Vision restoration therapy and raising red flags too early. Br J Ophthalmol 2006, 90:659–660.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Caplan LR, Firlik A, Newman NJ, et al.: Vision restoration therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89:1229.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Centers offering VRT. http://www.novavision.com/directory.php. Accessed August 4, 2006.

  35. Performing NovaVision VRT at home. http://www.novavision.com/treatment-patid-19.html. Accessed August 4, 2006.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victoria S. Pelak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pelak, V.S., Dubin, M. & Whitney, E. Homonymous hemianopia: A critical analysis of optical devices, compensatory training, and NovaVision. Curr Treat Options Neurol 9, 41–47 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-007-0029-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-007-0029-y

Keywords

Navigation