Relationships in glaucoma patients between standard vision tests, quality of life, and ability to perform daily activities

Ophthalmic Epidemiology

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 144-151

  Richman, Jesse ^a,b   Lorenzana, Luciano L ^a   Lankaranian, Dara ^a   Dugar, Jyoti ^a   Mayer, Jason R ^a   Wizov, Sheryl S ^a   Spaeth, George L ^a  

^a WILLS EYE HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Activities of daily living; ADREV; Disability; Glaucoma; NEI VFQ 25; Performance based measure; Visual assessment; Visual function

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF DISABILITY RELATED TO VISION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISC DAMAGE LIKELIHOOD SCALE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE VISUAL FUNCTION QUESTIONNAIRE; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF REPORT; STANDARD; STEREOSCOPIC VISION; VISION TEST; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISABILITY; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRE; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; VERY ELDERLY; VISION DISORDERS; YOUNG ADULT;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; VISION DISORDERS; VISION TESTS; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELDS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77952257689     PISSN: 09286586     EISSN: 17445086     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09286581003734878     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Brown GC. Vision and quality-of-life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1999;97:473-511.
2. Feinstein AR, Josephy BR, Wells CK. Scientifc and clinical problems in indexes of functional disability. Ann Intern Med. 1986; 105 (3) : 413-420.
3. Poser S, Bornstein BH, McGorty EK. Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: the view from the bench and the jury box. Law Hum Behav. 2003; 27 (1) : 53-68.
4. Baus S. Psychological aspects of visual impairment. Br J Vis Impair. 1999;17:41-44.
5. Duberstein PR, Sorensen S, Lyness JM, et al. Personality is associated with perceived health and functional status in older primary care patients. Psychol Aging. 2003; 18 (1) : 25-37.
6. Owsley C, McGwin G Jr. Depression and the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire in older adults. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111 (12) : 2259-2264.
7. Jampel HD, Schwartz A, Pollack I, et al. Glaucoma patients' assessment of their visual function and quality of life. J Glaucoma. 2002; 11 (2) : 154-163.
8. Friedman SM, Munoz B, Rubin GS, et al. Characteristics of discrepancies between self-reported visual function and measured reading speed. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999; 40 (5) : 858-864.
9. West SK, Munoz B, Rubin GS, et al. Compensatory strategy use identifies risk of incident disability for the visually impaired. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005; 123 (9) : 1242-1247.
10. West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, et al. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120 (6) : 774-780.
11. Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol. 1994; 49 (2) : M85-M94.
12. Szlyk JP, Seiple W, Fishman GA, et al. Perceived and actual performance of daily tasks: relationship to visual function tests in individuals with retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology. 2001; 108 (1) : 65-75.
13. Owsley C, McGwin G Jr, Sloane ME, et al. Timed instrumental activities of daily living tasks: relationship to visual function in older adults. Optom Vis Sci. 2001 May; 78 (5) : 350-359.
14. Szlyk JP, Arditi A, Coffey B, et al. Self report in functional assessment of low vision. J Vis Imp Blind. 1990;84:61-66.
15. Davis C, Lovie-Kitchin J, Thompson B. Psychosocial adjustment to age-related macular degeneration. J Vis Imp Blind. 1995;89:16-27.
16. Lamoureux EL, Hassell JB, Keeffe JE. The determinants of participation in activities of daily living in people with impaired vision. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004; 137 (2) : 265-270.
17. Lorenzana L, Lankaranian D, Dugar J, et al. A new method of assessing ability to perform activities of daily living: design, methods, and baseline data. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2009 Mar-Apr; 16 (2) : 107-114.
18. Altangerel U, Spaeth GL, Steinmann WC. Assessment of function related to vision (AFREV). Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2006; 13 (1) : 67-80.
19. West SK, Rubin GS, Munoz B, et al. Assessing functional status: correlation between performance on tasks conducted in a clinic setting and performance on the same task conducted at home. The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1997; 52 (4) : M209-M217.
20. Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya'ale D, et al. Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ. 2004; 82 (11) : 844-851.
21. Caprioli J. Clinical evaluation of the optic nerve in glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1994;92:589-641.
22. Jampel HD. Glaucoma patients' assessment of their visual function and quality of life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2001;99:301-317.
23. Chylack LT Jr, Leske MC, McCarthy D, et al. Lens opacities classification system II (LOCS II). Arch Ophthalmol. 1989; 107 (7) : 991-997.
24. Spaeth GL, Henderer J, Liu C, et al. The disc damage likelihood scale: reproducibility of a new method of estimating the amount of optic nerve damage caused by glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2002;100:181-185; discussion 185-186.
25. Bayer A, Harasymowycz P, Henderer JD, et al. Validity of a new disk grading scale for estimating glaucomatous damage: correlation with visual field damage. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002; 133 (6) : 758-763.
26. Hodapp E, Parrish II R, Anderson D. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc., 1993: 52-59.
27. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, et al. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001; 119 (7) : 1050-1058.
28. Bailey IL, Bullimore MA, Raasch TW, Taylor HR. Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991; 32 (2) : 422-432.
29. Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vis Sci. 1988;2:187-199.
30. Viswanathan AC, McNaught AI, Poinoosawmy D, et al. Severity and stability of glaucoma :patient perception compared with objective measurement. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117 (4) : 450-454.
31. Guralnik JM, Branch LG, Cummings SR, Curb JD. Physical performance measures in aging research. J Gerontol. 1989; 44 (5) : M141-M146.
32. Lamoureux EL, Ferraro JG, Pallant JF, et al. Are standard instruments valid for the assessment of quality of life and symptoms in glaucoma? Optom Vis Sci. 2007; 84 (8) : 789-796.
33. Kempen GI, van Heuvelen MJ, van den Brink RH, et al. Factors affecting contrasting results between self-reported and performance-based levels of physical limitation. Age Ageing. 1996; 25 (6) : 458-464.
34. Elam JT, Graney MJ, Beaver T, et al. Comparison of subjective ratings of function with observed functional ability of frail older persons. Am J Public Health. 1991; 81 (9) : 1127-1130.
35. Subramanian A, Dickinson C. Spatial localization in visual impairment. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47 (1) : 78-85.
36. Fried L P, Herdman SJ, Kuhn KE, et al. Preclinical disability: hypotheses about the bottom of the iceberg. J Aging Health. 1991; 3 (2) : 285-300.
37. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, et al. Visual disability variables. II: The difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005; 86 (5) : 954-967.
38. Rubin GS, Bandeen-Roche K, Huang GH, et al. The association of multiple visual impairments with self-reported visual disability: SEE project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001; 42 (1) : 64-72.
39. Safran AB, Landis T. From cortical plasticity to unawareness of visual field defects. J Neuroophthalmol. 1999; 19 (2) : 84-88.
40. Zandi M, Adib-Hajbagheri M, Memarian R, et al. Effects of a self-care program on quality of life of cirrhotic patients referring to Tehran Hepatitis Center. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:35.