Quality of Life in Glaucoma and Its Relationship with Visual Function

Nelson, Patricia; Aspinall, Peter; Papasouliotis, Orestis; Worton, Bruce; O’Brien, Colm

doi:10.1097/00061198-200304000-00009

Cited by 341 publications

(394 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

333

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients self-report difficultly with glare and moving between environments where lighting changes. 59 We have also shown that patients with advanced visual field loss have difficulty with searching for everyday objects and face recognition. 60,61 These studies took advantage of experiments that also tracked subjects' gaze as they carried out the tasks.…”

Section: Aspects Of Visual Disability In Glaucomamentioning

confidence: 82%

A view on glaucoma—are we seeing it clearly?

Crabb

2015

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful clinical management of glaucoma should not simply be about control of intraocular pressure, but must equate to correct decisions about intensifying treatment when patients are at risk of developing 'visual disability'. Yet little is known about what visual field defects, at different stages of glaucoma, specifically affect patients' abilities to perform everyday visual tasks. One way to do this is to measure patient performance in tasks in a lab setting. Another way is to ask patients themselves. The latter can be revealing and demystify views about how patients perceive the world. This short commentary highlights some of the current research in this area.

show abstract

Section: Aspects Of Visual Disability In Glaucomamentioning

confidence: 82%

A view on glaucoma—are we seeing it clearly?

Crabb

2015

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…QoL is a multi-dimensional concept, yet the GQL-15 only contains items representing visual activities, which is only one dimension of QoL. 27,28 The same is true for the GSI, pretending to measure the impact of glaucoma symptoms on QoL, yet mostly containing items related to visual activities as well. 26 …”

Section: Pro's Addressing Functional Status Related To Visionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, the tools for assessing functional status demonstrated poor quality both in view of their development as well as for their validation process. Yet, further adaptation and testing could improve instruments with potential, such as the GQL-15, IMQ and the GSI [24][25][26][27][28] Within the QoL-measures, both the Glau-QoL and VisQoL had an extensive and theory based development process, but were generated and validated according to classical techniques. [43][44][45] Applying additional Rasch-analysis could strengthen their content and validity.…”

Section: Eyementioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO's) in glaucoma: a systematic review

Vandenbroeck

Geest

Zeyen

et al. 2011

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this review was to summarize literature in view of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for glaucoma and provide guidance on how outcomes are best assessed based on evidence about their content and validity. A systematic literature review was performed on papers describing the developmental process and/or psychometric properties of glaucoma or vision-specific PRO-instruments. Each of them was assessed on their adherence to a framework of quality criteria. Fifty-three articles were identified addressing 27 PRO-instruments. In all, 18 PRO's were developed for glaucoma and 9 for diverse ophthalmologic conditions. Seven instruments addressed functional status, 11 instruments quality of life and 9 instruments disease and treatment-related factors. Most of the instruments demonstrated only partially adherence to predefined quality standards. The tools for assessing functional status were of poor quality, while the Glaucoma Quality of Life Questionnaire and the Vision Quality of Life Index were well-developed QoL measures, yet only validated using classical techniques. The Rasch-scaled QoL-tools, IVI and VCM1 need to improve their item-content for glaucoma patients. The questionnaires to measure adherence should improve their validity and the Treatment Satisfaction Survey for Intra Ocular Pressure pops out as the highest quality tool for measuring topical treatment side effects. This review revealed that most PRO-instruments demonstrated poor developmental quality, more specifically a lack of conceptual framework and item generation strategies not involving the patients' perspective. Psychometric characteristics were mostly tested using classical validation techniques.

show abstract

“…Accordingly, several validated surveys have been developed over the past several years that evaluate the impact of glaucoma on a patient's activities of daily living and vision. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Further, several years ago Laibovitz et al 10 validated the Comparison of Ophthalmic Medications for Quality of Life questionnaire (COMQoL), which was designed to compare specifically the tolerability of ophthalmic medications and to evaluate the effect of ocular hypotensive therapy on side effects, routine living activities, quality of life, compliance, and patient satisfaction with medication. The data were used to show an increased preference for dorzolamide compared to pilocarpine due to reasons of side effects and patient satisfaction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%