Community-based vision rehabilitation provision in England

TY - JOUR

T1 - Community-based vision rehabilitation provision in England

AU - Rabiee, Parvaneh

AU - Bernard, Sylvia Margaret

AU - Baxter, Kate

AU - Parker, Gillian Mary

N1 - © The Author(s) 2016. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details. No embargo.

PY - 2016/9

Y1 - 2016/9

N2 - Sight loss is more common among older than younger people. With an ageing population and increasing pressure on health and social care services, preventive and rehabilitation services are being prioritised. However, evidence around community-based vision rehabilitation services is underdeveloped. The focus of this article is on the prevalence, organisational models and capacity of community-based vision rehabilitation services in England that are wholly or partly funded by local authorities (LAs). Eighty-nine of the 152 (57%) LAs responded to an online survey about vision rehabilitation services. Services vary widely in: the type of provider, type of support offered, structure and skills of the team delivering interventions, caseloads and waiting times. Voluntary organisations appear to experience more pressure on budgets and staffing ratios than LA in-house services. The article discusses implications for practice.

AB - Sight loss is more common among older than younger people. With an ageing population and increasing pressure on health and social care services, preventive and rehabilitation services are being prioritised. However, evidence around community-based vision rehabilitation services is underdeveloped. The focus of this article is on the prevalence, organisational models and capacity of community-based vision rehabilitation services in England that are wholly or partly funded by local authorities (LAs). Eighty-nine of the 152 (57%) LAs responded to an online survey about vision rehabilitation services. Services vary widely in: the type of provider, type of support offered, structure and skills of the team delivering interventions, caseloads and waiting times. Voluntary organisations appear to experience more pressure on budgets and staffing ratios than LA in-house services. The article discusses implications for practice.

KW - Visual impairment

KW - sight loss

KW - community-based vision rehabilitation

KW - adults

KW - national survey

U2 - 10.1177/0264619616658313

DO - 10.1177/0264619616658313

M3 - Article

VL - 34

JO - British Journal of Visual Impairment

JF - British Journal of Visual Impairment

IS - 3

M1 - BJVI-15-0033.R2

ER -