Views of glaucoma patients on aspects of their treatment: An assessment of patient preference by conjoint analysis

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 47, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 2885-2888

  Bhargava, Jonathan S ^a   Patel, Bakula ^b   Foss, Alexander J E ^a   Avery, Anthony J ^b   King, Anthony J ^a  

^a QUEEN S MEDICAL CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; TRABECULECTOMY; VISION; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; EPIDEMIOLOGY; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; PATIENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICS; VISUAL DISORDER;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLINDNESS; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENTS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRABECULECTOMY; VISION, LOW;

EID: 33746697235     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.05-1244     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Tuck MW, Crick RP. The age distribution of primary open angle glaucoma. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1998;5:173-183.
2. Leske MC, Wu SY, Hyman L, Nemesure B, Hennis A, Schachat AP. Four-year incidence of visual impairment: Barbados Incidence Study of Eye Diseases. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:118-124.
3. Foran S, Wang JJ, Mitchell P. Causes of visual impairment in two older population cross-sections: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2003;10:215-225.
4. Vernon SA. The changing pattern of glaucoma referrals by optometrists. Eye. 1998;12:854-857.
5. Edmunds B, Thompson JR, Salmon JF, Wormald RP. The National Survey of Trabeculectomy. II. Variations in operative technique and outcome. Eye. 2001;15:441-448.
6. Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, et al. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1943-1953.
7. Janz NK, Wren PA, Lichter PR, et al. The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: interim quality of life findings after initial medical or surgical treatment of glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1954-1965.
8. Ross MA, Avery AJ, Foss AJ. Views of older people on cataract surgery options: an assessment of preferences by conjoint analysis. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12:13-17.
9. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, et al. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5:1-186.
10. Van der Pol M, Cairns J. establishing patient preferences for blood transfusion support: an application of conjoint analysis. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998;3:794-799.
11. Ryan M. Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:535-546.
12. Singh J, Cuttler L, Shin M, Silvers JB, Neuhauser D. Medical decision-making and the patient: understanding preference patterns for growth hormone therapy using conjoint analysis. Med Care. 1998;36(8 suppl):AS31-AS45.
13. Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ. 2000;320:1530-1533.
14. SPSS Categories 6.1. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.; 1994.
15. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, Spritzer K, Berry S, Hays RD. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:1050-1058.
16. Jampel HD, Schwartz A, Pollack I, Abrams D, Weiss H, Miller R. Glaucoma patients' assessment of their visual function and quality of life. J Glaucoma. 2002;11:154-163.
17. Sumi I, Shirato S, Matsumoto S, Araie M. The relationship between visual disability and visual field in patients with glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:332-339.
18. Iester M, Zingirian M. Quality of life in patients with early, moderate and advanced glaucoma. Eye. 2002;16:44-49.
19. Ryan M, McIntosh E, Shackley P. Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care. Health Econ. 1998;7:373-378.
20. Ryan M, McIntosh E, Shackley P. Using conjoint analysis to elicit the views of health service users: an application to the patient health card. Health Expect. 1998;1:117-129.
21. Ryan M, Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management. Health Econ. 1997;6:261-273.