Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument to Surgical Correction of Refractive Error

Ophthalmology

Volumn 110, Issue 12, 2003, Pages 2302-2309

  McDonnell, Peter J ^a,b,g   Mangione, Carol ^c,d   Lee, Paul ^e   Lindblad, Anne S ^f   Spritzer, Karen L ^c,d   Berry, Sandy ^c   Hays, Ron D ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e DUKE UNIVERSITY EYE CENTER   (United States)

^f EMMES CORPORATION   (United States)

^g JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE SURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERMETROPIA; KERATOREFRACTIVE SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MYOPIA; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; REFRACTION ERROR; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 0344874646     PISSN: 01616420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.02.004     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Hays R. Measurement of visual functioning and health-related quality of life in eye disease and cataract surgery. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:1045-51.
2. Scott IU, Schein OD, West S, et al. Functional status and quality of life measurement among ophthalmic patients. Arch Ophthalmol 1994;112:329-35.
3. Javitt JC, Brenner MH, Curbow B, et al. Outcomes of cataract surgery. Improvement in visual acuity and subjective visual function after surgery in the first, second, and both eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 1993;111:686-91.
4. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 1994;112:630-8.
5. Sloan ME, Ball K, Owsley C, et al. The visual activities questionnaire: developing an instrument for assessing problems in everyday visual tasks. Tech Dig Noninvasive Assess Vis Sys 1992;1:26-9.
6. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, et al. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation on vision and physical function in elderly patients. JAMA 1987;257:1064-6.
7. Bernth-Petersen P. Visual functioning in cataract patients. Methods for measuring and results. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1981;59:198-205.
8. Glynn RJ, Seddon JM, Krug JH Jr, et al. Falls in elderly patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1991;109:205-10.
9. Russell PW, Sekuler R, Fetkenhour C. Visual functioning after pan-retinal photocoagulation: a survey. Diabetes Care 1985:8:57-60.
10. Ebert EM, Fine AM, Markowitz J, et al. Functional vision in patients with neovascular maculopathy and poor visual acuity. Arch Ophthalmol 1986;104:1009-12.
11. Jackson E. Norms of refraction. JAMA 1932;98:132-7.
12. Downing AH. Ocular defects in sixty thousand selectees. Arch Ophthalmol 1945;33:137-43.
13. Curtin BJ. The Myopias: The Basic Science and Clinical Management. New York: Harper and Row Publishers Inc.; 1985.
14. Bourque LB, Lynn MJ, Waring GO 3rd, Cartwright C. Spectacle and contact lens wearing six years after radial keratotomy in the Prospective Evaluation of Radial Keratotomy Study. Ophthalmology 1994;101:421-31.
15. McDonnell PJ, Nizam A, Lynn MJ, Waring GO 3rd. Morning-to-evening change in refraction, corneal curvature, and visual acuity 11 years after radial keratotomy in the Prospective Evaluation of Radial Keratotomy Study. Ophthalmology 1996;103:233-9.
16. Maguen E, Machat JJ, Salz JJ. Results and complications of photorefractive keratectomy. In: Krachmer JH, Mannis MJ, Hollan EJ, Eds. Cornea. Surgery of the Cornea and Conjunctiva. Vol. 3. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997:2191-210.
17. Hays RD, Mangione CM, Ellwein L, et al. Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument. Ophthalmology 2003;110:2292-301.
18. Maguire LJ. Keratorefractive surgery, success, and the public health. Am J Ophthalmol 1994;117:394-8.
19. Vitale S, Schein OD, Meinert CL, Steinberg EP. The Refractive Status and Vision Profile: a questionnaire to measure vision-related quality of life in persons with refractive error. Ophthalmology 2000;107:1529-39.
20. Schein OD, Vitale S, Cassard SD, Steinberg EP. Patient outcomes of refractive surgery, The refractive status and vision profile. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:665-73. Comment in: J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:645-6.
21. Schein OD, Vitale S, Cassard SD, Steinberg EP. Patient outcomes of refractive surgery, The refractive status and vision profile. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:665-73. Comment in: J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:645-6.
22. Hays RD, Anderson RT, Revicki D. Assessing reliability and validity of measurement in clinical trials. In: Staquet M, Hays R, Fayers P, eds. Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 1998:169-82.
23. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992;112:155-9.
24. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press; 1988.
25. Waring GO 3rd. Standardized data collection and reporting for refractive surgery. Refract Corneal Surg 1992;8(suppl):1-42.
26. Koch DD, Kohnen T, Obstbaum SA, Rosen ES. Format for reporting refractive surgical data. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998;24:285-7.
27. Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research. Pharmacoeconomics 2000;18:419-23.