The development and assessment of a self-perceived quality of vision questionnaire to test pseudophakic patients

Ophthalmic Epidemiology

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 241-253

  Aslam, T M ^a,b   Gilmour, D ^a   Hopkinson, S ^a   Patton, N ^a   Aspinall, P ^a  

^a PRINCESS ALEXANDRA EYE PAVILION   (United Kingdom)

^b NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cataract surgery; Intraocular lenses; Photopsias; Posterior capsular opacification; Pseudophakia; Quality of life; Questionnaire validity; Visual acuity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CATARACT; CATARACT EXTRACTION; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; LENS IMPLANT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSEUDOPHAKIA; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANK SUM TEST; RELIABILITY; SELF CONCEPT; VALIDATION PROCESS; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; CATARACT EXTRACTION; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PSEUDOPHAKIA; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 5644229843     PISSN: 09286586     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09286580490514568     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Carr AJHI, Robinson PG. Quality of Life. London: BMJ Books, 2003.
2. Jenkinson CMH. Health status measurement. A brief but critical introduction. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press, 1998.
3. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112(5):630-638.
4. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. National study of cataract surgery outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures [comment]. Ophthalmology. 1994;101(6): 1131-1140; discussion, 1140-1141.
5. Musch DC, Farjo AA, Meyer RF, et al. Assessment of health-related quality of life after corneal transplantation. Am J Ophthalmol. 1997;124(1):1-8.
6. Linder M, Chang TS, Scott IU, et al. Validity of the visual function index (VF-14) in patients with retinal disease. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999; 117(12):1611-1616.
7. Davison JA. Positive and negative dysphotopsia in patients with acrylic intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(9):1346-1355.
8. Farbowitz MA, Zabriskie NA, Crandall AS, et al. Visual complaints associated with the AcrySof acrylic intraocular lens (1). J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(9): 1339-1345.
9. Masket S. Truncated edge design, dysphotopsia, and inhibition of posterior capsule opacification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(1): 145-147.
10. Nishi O, Nishi K, Wicksrom K. Preventing lens epithelial cell migration using intraocular lenses with sharp rectangular edges. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(10): 1543-1549.
11. Veale B. Questionnaire design and surveys. Aust Fam Physician. 1998;27(6):499-502.
12. Armbrecht AM, Findlay C, Kaushal S, et al. Is cataract surgery justified in patients with age-related macular degeneration? A visual function and quality of life assessment [comment]. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000; 84(12):1343-1348.
13. Cassard SD, Patrick DL, Damiano AM, et al. Reproducibility and responsiveness of the VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataracts. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113(12): 1508-1513.
14. Shipper I. Glare and light streaks: a complication of IOL implantation [letter; comment]. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25(5):604-605.
15. Tester R, Pace NL, Samore M, Olson RJ. Dysphotopsia in phakic and pseudophakic patients: incidence and relation to intraocular lens type (2). J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(6): 810-816.
16. Uchio E, Ohno S, Kusakawa T. Spherical aberration and glare disability with intraocular lenses of different optical design. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995; 21(6):690-696.
17. Prasad A, Asbell PA, Senie RT. Evaluation of glare in normal and pseudophakic subjects. Ann Ophthalmol. 1991;23(7):268-272.
18. Dey RA, Inui TS. Toward clinical application of health status measures: sensitivity of scales to clinically important changes. Health Services Res. 1984;19(3): 277-289.
19. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307-310.
20. Petrie ASC. Medical Statistics. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd., 2000.
21. Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet. 1995;346(8982):1085- 1087.
22. Brinberg DMJ. Validity and the research process. London: Sage Publications Ltd., 1985.