Low Vision Services Survey Barbara McLaughlan Survey Project Manager RNIB/AMD Alliance UK

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Methodology Separate questionnaires mailed to –2,534 known and potential low vision services providers (hospitals, Social Services Departments, local societies, sample of opticians/optometry practices, specialist teachers, universities) –285 Primary care organisations (PCTs, Health and Social Services Boards) Response rates: 59% and 32% respectively

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Main areas of concern Emotional support as part of a multi- agency approach Advertising of services Training in the use of low vision devices and frequency of appointments PCT involvement Quality of services Funding

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Multi-disciplinary working and emotional support A majority of services providers have links with ophthalmologists, local societies and GPs Social Services have the highest number of links with external agencies Only one in five service providers have links with counsellors. This indicates that service providers may underestimate the need for emotional support

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Service provider assessment of quality of services One third said services were good or very good. One third said they were satisfactory. One quarter said they were less than satisfactory or unsatisfactory. 12 per cent did not reply

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference PCT assessment of quality of low vision services 35 per cent thought services were good or very good. 29 per cent said they were satisfactory 16 per cent said they were less than satisfactory or unsatisfactory 20 per cent did not know

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Main reasons for quality rating Good rating based on: positive feedback from users, a well-established and professional service, well-trained staff and service improvements. Negative rating because: service is too slow or not comprehensive, patients are unaware of the service, lack of funding, lack of accessibility, services are generally stretched

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Link with Low Vision Services Committees 84 per cent of local societies 75 per cent of Social Services Departments 64 per cent of hospitals 48 per cent of teachers 22 per cent of opticians/optometry practices (base: those who know of existence of LVSC in their area)

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Impact of LVSCs Just over half of all providers think LVSCs have had a positive or very positive impact. Just under half think that they have made no difference

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Assessment without opticians/optometry practices Two thirds of hospitals, Local Societies, Social Services and specialist teachers said that LSVCs had had a positive or very positive impact. Around one third said LVSCs had made no difference and local societies were the only agencies that mentioned a negative impact. (Only 5 per cent).

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Opticians/optometry practice and LVSCs Of the opticians/optometry practices who were aware of the existence of a Low Vision Services Committee in their area 60 per cent felt that the committee had made no difference, 29 per cent said it had had a positive impact and 11 per cent felt it had made a very positive impact.

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference PCTs and Low Vision Services Committees 59 per cent think that the LVSC in their area has made a positive or very positive impact. 31 per cent think it has made no difference. 8 per cent did not know.

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference PCT involvement in LVSCs 61 per cent regularly send a representative to LVSC meetings. 29 per cent occasionally. 10 per cent never. We do not know what level of representation in terms of seniority.

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Link between quality of service and LVSC assessment Out of the 23 PCTs rating local services as good, 8 said the LVSC had had a very positive impact. Out of the 16 per cent of PCTs who thought that the quality of services in their area was less than satisfactory or unsatisfactory nine have an LVSC

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference Main conclusions for LVSCs LVSCs may need to improve on inter- agency links, particularly with opticians/optometry practices. The impact of LVSCs is variable. LVSCs that have made a positive impact may want to partner with those who are struggling to make an impact

3 November 2006Low Vision Services Committees Conference General Conclusion A report on the survey findings will be published at the end of November The report identifies a number of areas for improvements that should be assessed by individual LVSCs. Please contact Barbara McLaughlan for a copy of the report. Tel: