Materials and Methods: We included 25 RP patients in this prospective study. Comprehensive ophthalmological examination, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), corrected near visual acuity (CNVA), contrast sensitivity (CS), reading performance and life quality questionnaires were evaluated by using TGs and FGs. Low Vision Quality of Life (LVQOL) and National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ/TR) were applied.

Results: The mean age was 25.4±8.29 years. Patients of 19 were at the moderate stage of RP and 6 of them were in the advanced stage. The mean DVAs were (LogMAR) 0.48±0.29 with TGs and 0.46±0.32 with FGs. The difference was not statistically significant (p=0.65). The mean CS were found higher with FGs (0.44±0.31log) than with TGs (0.68±0.27 log) (p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in reading acuities and critical print size but maximum reading speeds were significantly higher with FGs (67.6±28 words/minute) than TGs (52.4±20.15 words/minute) (p =0.028). The total scores of the LVQOL were 53.44 ±11.37 with TGs and 65.16 ±10.66 with FGs and that is a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). FG was found statistically superior to TG in other sub-titles except reading (p=0.069). The scores of the NEI VFQ-25/TR; general health, general vision, role difficulty and colour vision subunits scores were not statistically difference however in NEI VFQ 39/TR; general vision score was statistically higher in FGs. In ocular pain, near and distance vision, mental health, independence and peripherical vision sub-titles, FG was superior to TG.

Conclusion: In low vision RP patents, FGs reduce subjective complaints, provide visual function and increase life quality more than TGs. Using expanded form of the questionnaire gives more accurate results. Keywords : Filtered glasses, low vision, retinitis pigmentosa, telescopic glass, visual rehabilitation