Usabilidade de aplicativos gratuitos de smartphone como recurso de leitura em pacientes com baixa visão

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Silva, Paula Baptista Eliseo Da [UNIFESP]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
• Palavras-chave em Português: Low Vision; Smartphone; Reading; Baixa Visão; Reabilitação; Leitura
• Link de acesso: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=7654648; https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/59186

Objective: The difficulty in reading is one of the main complaints of individuals with low vision referred for visual rehabilitation, since reading is fundamental for full participation in modern society, permeating productive, intellectual and cultural activities, among others. The improvement in reading performance can be achieved with the use of magnification aids and/or optimization of text readability. The use of digital technologies in reading rehabilitation offers advantages in terms of cost, portability, accessibility and social acceptance. The purpose of this study was to investigate the usability of free smartphone apps with magnification tools as reading aid in low vision patients. Methods: Subjects aged 18 years or older referred to reading rehabilitation with best-corrected visual acuity from 0.6 to 1.3 logMAR in the better-vision eye and usage habit of touchscreen smartphone ≥12 months were included. Among the apps available for the Android operating system, the three with the highest popularity rating, latest update, and interface best suited to the needs of those with low vision were selected. Their usability was accessed using self-reported efficiency scores (from 0 to 10) by patients for accessibility, ease of use for focus adjustment and for text tracking. Binocular near visual acuity and reading performance accessed by acuity and reading speed were measured with the best optical correction and selected apps. The three apps selected (A1, A2, and A3) were compared for utility and efficiency. Statistical models included paired t-test, Wilcoxon and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Statistical significance was considered as p≤0.05 with two-tailed rejection region. Results: 17 participants were included with ages ranging from 26 to 73 years (mean=45.2±13.1 years, median=46.0 years). The apps showed positive and comparable results of utility and efficiency. The three apps presented good results of utility (≥7.0), with A3 presenting the best average score (8.9±1.0, median=9.3). Comparing binocular near visual acuity values with and without the apps, there was a statistically significant difference, with increased visual efficiency for A1 (t=17.5670 and p<0.01), A2 (t=18.0689 and p<0.01) and A3 (t = 18,2006 and p<0.01). There was also a significant improvement in reading acuity with the use of the apps (A1, t=13.5700 and p<0.01; A2, t=21.4199 and p <0.01; A3, t = 20.6606 and p<0,01), but with no statistical difference for reading speed (A1, z=0.639 and p=0.5228; A2, z=0.876 and p=0.3812; A3, z=0.450 and p=0.6529). Conclusion: Tested apps achieved good utility ratios and proved to be efficient, confirming the usability of free smartphone applications with magnification tools and optimization of readability of printed texts as digital resources for visual reading rehabilitation in patients with low vision.