Measuring quality of vision including negative dysphotopsia.
Rasch analysis
negative dysphotopsia
patient reported outcomes
quality of vision questionnaire
Journal
Acta ophthalmologica
ISSN: 1755-3768
Titre abrégé: Acta Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101468102
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Sep 2023
12 Sep 2023
Historique:
revised:
15
08
2023
received:
27
04
2023
accepted:
29
08
2023
medline:
12
9
2023
pubmed:
12
9
2023
entrez:
12
9
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To adapt the Quality of Vision Questionnaire (QoV) for measuring negative dysphotopsia and to validate the original and modified versions in the Dutch population. The QoV was translated into Dutch according to standardized methodology. Negative dysphotopsia items were constructed based on focus group interviews, literature review and clinical data. The questionnaire was completed by 404 subjects, including contact lens wearers, patients with cataract and after cataract surgery (95.5% with a monofocal, 4.5% with a multifocal intraocular lens). Rasch analysis was applied for evaluation of reliability and validity of the original QoV and modified version, Negative Dysphotopsia QoV (ND-QoV). The frequency, severity and bothersome scales of the QoV and ND-QoV demonstrated good measurement precision, good fit statistics for all but one item, but significant mistargeting of more than one logit. Item estimations were stable across the study groups and scales were unidimensional with more than 50% of variance explained by the measurements. There was a positive correlation between questionnaire scores and best corrected visual acuity (r = 0.3, p < 0.01). The quality of vision measured by all three scales was significantly poorer (p < 0.01) in patients with negative dysphotopsia compared to asymptomatic pseudophakic patients. The Dutch version of the QoV questionnaire has shown good psychometric properties comparable to the native version as well as good reliability and validity. The addition of negative dysphotopsia items is a valuable modification for the reliable assessment of quality of vision in pseudophakic patients.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.
Références
Andrich, D. (1978) Ratin formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43(4), 561-573.
Aslam, T.M., Dhillon, B., Tallentire, V.R., Patton, N. & Aspinal, P. (2004) Development of a forced choice photographic questionnaire for photic phenomena and its testing - repeatability, reliability and validity. Ophthalmologica, 218(6), 402-410. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1159/000080944
Aslam, T.M., Gupta, M., Gilmour, D., Patton, N. & Dhillon, B. (2007) Long-term prevalence of pseudophakic photic phenomena. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 143(3), 522-524. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2006.10.031
Bland, J.M. & Altman, D.G. (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1(8476), 307-310.
Bond, T.G. & Fox, C.M. (2015) Applying the Rasch model. Fundamental measurement in the human sciences, 3rd edition. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis group.
Boone, W.J. & Noltemeyer, A. (2017) Rasch analysis: a primer for school psychology researchers and practitioners. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1416898. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2017.1416898
Davison, J.A. (2000) Positive and negative dysphotopsia in patients with acrylic intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 26(9), 1346-1355.
Davison, J.A. (2002) Clinical performance of Alcon SA30AL and SA60AT single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 28(7), 1112-1123.
Duncan, P.W., Bode, R.K., Lai, S.M., Perera, S. & Neuroprotection, G.A. (2003) Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the stroke impact scale. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(7), 950-963. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00035-2
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C. & Beaton, D. (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417-1432.
Hecht, I., Kanclerz, P. & Tuuminen, R. (2023) Secondary outcomes of lens and cataract surgery: more than just "best-corrected visual acuity". Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, 95, 101150. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2022.101150
Jin, Y., Zabriskie, N. & Olson, R.J. (2009) Dysphotopsia outcomes analysis of two truncated acrylic 6.0-mm intraocular optic lenses. Ophthalmologica, 223(1), 47-51. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1159/000167793
Kinard, K., Jarstad, A. & Olson, R.J. (2013) Correlation of visual quality with satisfaction and function in a normal cohort of pseudophakic patients. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 39(4), 590-597.
Krueger, R.A. & Casey, M.A. (2000) Focus Groups. A practical guide for applied research.
Linacre, J.M. (2016) A User's Guide to WINSTEPS. Winsteps.com
Lundstrom, M., Dickman, M., Henry, Y., Manning, S., Rosen, P., Tassignon, M.J. et al. (2021) Changing practice patterns in European cataract surgery as reflected in the European registry of quality outcomes for cataract and refractive surgery 2008 to 2017. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 47(3), 373-378. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000457
Makhotkina, N.Y., Nijkamp, M.D., Berendschot, T.T.J.M., van den Borne, B. & Nuijts, R.M.M.A. (2018) Effect of active evaluation on the detection of negative dysphotopsia after sequential cataract surgery: discrepancy between incidences of unsolicited and solicited complaints. Acta Ophthalmologica, 96(1), 81-87.
Masket, S. & Fram, N.R. (2021) Pseudophakic Dysphotopsia: review of incidence, cause, and treatment of positive and negative Dysphotopsia. Ophthalmology, 128(11), e195-e205. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.08.009
McAlinden, C., Khadka, J. & Pesudovs, K. (2015) Precision (repeatability and reproducibility) studies and sample-size calculation. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 41(12), 2598-2604. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.06.029
McAlinden, C., Pesudovs, K. & Moore, J.E. (2010) The development of an instrument to measure quality of vision: the quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 51(11), 5537-5545. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.10-5341
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Dickinson, W.B., Leech, N.L. & Zoran, A.G. (2009) A qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1-21.
Pesudovs, K., Burr, J.M., Harley, C. & Elliott, D.B. (2007) The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires. Optometry and Vision Science, 84(8), 663-674. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e318141fe75
Radford, S.W., Carlsson, A.M. & Barrett, G.D. (2007) Comparison of pseudophakic dysphotopsia with Akreos adapt and SN60-AT intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 33(1), 88-93. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.09.014
Wright, B.D., Linacre, J.M., Gustafson, J.E. & Martin-Lof, P. (1994) Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370-371.