Abstract

Visual impairments are common post-stroke and can lead to diminished functioning and difficulty accomplishing everyday tasks, such as reading and navigating unfamiliar environments independently. This pilot study investigates the usability, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of technological visuo-cognitive training (TVT) using the Senaptec Sensory Station for stroke survivors with visual field loss. Ten stroke survivors (8 males, 2 females; 43–79 years old; Mage = 65, SDage = 11.03) with a non-progressive visual field defect underwent TVT comprising baseline assessment, five 30-minute training sessions over 2–3 weeks, and post-intervention assessment. Measures of visual cognition, patient-reported outcomes, usability, and acceptability were assessed pre- and post-intervention, supplemented by qualitative interviews. Participants demonstrated meaningful gains in several aspects of visual search and functional vision. Reaction times on target capture tasks improved significantly, mirrored by more efficient performance on the Bell’s Test. These behavioural changes aligned with reductions in reported visual difficulties and fatigue, both showing large effect sizes. Across sessions, participants also showed improvement in hand–eye coordination and visuomotor integration. Engagement with the system was high: perceived competence increased and usability ratings were excellent. Qualitative accounts contextualised these findings, describing enjoyment of the technology, occasional challenges related to adaptive difficulty or physical limitations, and perceived benefits such as greater awareness of visual scanning strategies in daily life. Notably, several sensory measures (e.g., visual clarity, contrast sensitivity, depth perception) remained unchanged, indicating that improvements were domain-specific rather than global. Overall, TVT demonstrated acceptability with selective improvements in visual search function and vision-related quality of life. Larger randomised controlled trials are needed to determine efficacy and comparative effectiveness against standard rehabilitation approaches.