MP-1 Biofeedback: Pattern Stimulus Versus Audio-feedback in AMD

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Background:

Biofeedback techniques have demonstrated their uselfulness in the treatment of maculopathies. We wanted to evaluate the efficacy of visual rehabilitation by means of two different types of biofeedback techniques in patients with age related macular degeneration (AMD).

Methods:

30 patients bilaterally affected by AMD were enrolled with a mean age of 76,38±8,77 yrs. Patients were randomly divided in two groups: Group A was treated with an acoustic biofeedback, Group B with luminous biofeedback of a black and white checkerboard flickering during the examination. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmological examination. Rehabilitation consisted in 12 training sessions of 10 minutes for each eye performed once a week for both groups. Statistical analysis was performed using t- test. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results:

Group A: visual acuity at the end of rehabilitation had improved, but this result was not statistically significant (p=0.054), reading speed showed a significant statistical improvement (p=0.031), as well as the fixation stability (p=0.0023) and single point mean retinal sensitivity value (p=0.044).

Group B: visual acuity improvement at the end of rehabilitation was statistically significant (p=0.048), reading speed showed a statistically significant improvement (p=0.024), as well as fixation stability (p=0.0012) and mean single point retinal sensitivity value (p=0.027). Final results for both groups were compared and patients in group B showed results which were statistically more significant.

Conclusion:

A contrast rich flickering biofeedback stimulus showed a statistically significant improvement in training the patients to modify their preferred retinal locus (PRL) in comparison to acoustic biofeedback. It is possible that increased involvement of the various retinal cell populations with visual stimuli create more efficient ganglion cell response that better utilize the residual retinal function.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Age Related Macular Degeneration

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

biofeedback training

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* We enrolled 30 patients (18 women and 12 men), ranging in age from 56-89 with a mean of 76.38 ±8.77, bilaterally affected by neovascular AMD from the Medical Retina Unit of the Department of Ophthalmology, University La Sapienza of Rome, Polo Pontino, A. Fiorini Hospital from August 2009 to July 2010.

Diagnosis of neovascular AMD was based on a complete ophthalmological examination including anterior and posterior segment biomicroscopy, Fluorescein Angiography (Heidelberg HRA2 FA module Heidelberg Germany), spectral domain OCT (Heidelberg HRA-2 OCT module Heidelberg Germany), microperimetry with MP-1 (NIDEK Technologies Padua Italy).

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients with other eye diseases (i.e. glaucoma, myopia, retinal detachment, etc), uncooperative patients and patients with media opacities were excluded.

Minimum Eligible Age

56 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

89 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University La Sapienza

Latina, , Italy

Site Status

Rome. Latina, , Italy

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Italy

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Vingolo EM, Salvatore S, Limoli PG. MP-1 biofeedback: luminous pattern stimulus versus acoustic biofeedback in age related macular degeneration (AMD). Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2013 Mar;38(1):11-6. doi: 10.1007/s10484-012-9203-4.

Reference Type DERIVED

PMID: 22903517 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

BIO0110

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id