1. Age-related macular degeneration
2. Measuring quality of life in MD
Measure | Country of origin | Actually measures | Validated for MD or closest population | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HS | LS | FS | VF | WB | QoL | |||
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) [13] | Denmark | √ | elderly | |||||
SF-36 [14] | USA | √ | √* | elderly | ||||
W-BQ12 [15] | UK | √* | MD | |||||
HUI-3 [25] | Canada | √ | √ | community | ||||
EQ5D (EuroQol) [27] | Europe | √ | √ | community | ||||
Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale (IADL) [30] | USA | √ | MD | |||||
Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) [31] | UK | √ | √ | Elderly | ||||
Sickness Impact Profile for vision (SIPv) [32] | UK | √ | √ | Retinal disease | ||||
Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS) [33] | USA | √ | MD | |||||
14-item Vision Function Questionnaire (VF-14) [34] | USA | √ | MD | |||||
Daily Living Tasks Dependent on Vision (DLTV) [36] | UK | √ | MD, cataract | |||||
Low vision QoL (LVQOL) [37] | UK | √ | √ | mixed sample including MD | ||||
National Eye Institute Vision Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ25, 39, 51) [38] | USA | √ | √ | MD | ||||
Measure of the Impact of MD on QoL (MacDQoL) [42, 44] | UK | √ | MD | |||||
Profile of Mood States (POMS) [65] | USA | √* | elderly | |||||
Quality of Well-being Scale (QWB) [66] | USA | √ | elderly | |||||
Diagnostic and statistical manual (DSMIV) [69] | USA | √ | adults | |||||
Functional Vision Screening Questionnaire (FVSQ) [71] | USA | √ | Vision impaired | |||||
Community Disability Scale (CDS) [72] | USA | √ | adults | |||||
Life Satisfaction Index – Wellbeing [87] | UK | √ | elderly | |||||
General Health Questionnaire [110] | UK | √* | elderly | |||||
Positive and Negative Affect Scale [131] | USA | √* | adults | |||||
Vision-related QoL (VQOL) [117] | UK | √ | √ | Vision impaired | ||||
Manchester Low Vision Questionnaire (MLVQ) [118] | UK | √ | MD | |||||
Geriatric Depression Scale [115] | UK | √ | elderly | |||||
Psychological General Well-being Index (PGWB) [123] | USA | √* | adults | |||||
Multilevel Assessment Instrument (MAI) [132] | USA | √ | elderly | |||||
Freiburg Inventory on Coping with Illness [133] | Germany | coping | adults |
2.1 Measuring Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in eye disease
2.1.1 Psychological well-being measures
2.1.2 Health status (HS) measures
2.1.3 Functional status (FS) measures
2.1.4 Vision-specific functional status (VF)
2.1.5 Vision-specific individualised quality of life measures
2.2 Validation of questionnaires
-
Content validity: The extent to which the topic of interest is comprehensively and relevantly investigated by the measure. Patient involvement in the design of a patient reported outcome measure is vital in ensuring content validity.
-
Face validity: The extent to which the questionnaire appears to measure what it is intended to measure. Researchers selecting questionnaires should consider the questions carefully. They would then see that the EQ5D (also called EuroQol) in fact asks about health and not about QoL [11].
-
Internal consistency reliability: The extent to which the items contribute to measuring the same construct (a reliability coefficient is calculated).
-
Test-retest reliability: The extent to which scores remain stable over time when no change has occurred (i.e. when there has been no change in vision, no treatment for MD or rehabilitation).
-
Construct validity: Hypotheses concerning the relationship of questionnaire scores to other measures (such as VA or contrast sensitivity) are tested. Ability to discriminate between levels of disease severity (e.g. between people who are registered blind, partially sighted or not registered) is important, particularly for a visual function measure, which would be expected to correlate strongly with disease severity.
-
Responsiveness: Sensitivity to real change over time (e.g. deterioration in VA or contrast sensitivity).
-
Interpretability: The extent to which change scores can be interpreted and explained.
2.3 QALYs and other manipulations of PROs
2.3.1 Obtaining utility or preference measures
Time trade off
Standard gamble
3. Impact of MD
3.1 Psychological well-being
3.2 Life satisfaction
4. Perceived quality of health care, satisfaction with the diagnostic consultation and their relationship to patient well-being
5 Extent of impairment
5.1 Bilateral and unilateral involvement
5.2 Dual sensory impairment
5.3 Co-morbidity
5.4. Visual hallucinations: Charles Bonnet Syndrome
6. Rehabilitation
6.1 Low vision aids provision and training
6.2 Psychosocial interventions
6.3 Levels of rehabilitation and support
7. Medical treatment
8. Future research
Discussion
-
increase public awareness
-
improve training for health professionals in communication skills and use and interpretation of PRO measures
-
increase the provision of support, rehabilitation and LVA services
-
evaluate services provided with audit which includes PRO measurement
-
increase use of appropriate QoL measures as well as other suitable PRO measures in clinical trials of new treatments
-
increase funding for:
-
◦ research
-
◦ implementation of research findings
-
◦ continuing evaluation of the impact of diagnosis and service provision on visual function, well-being, satisfaction and quality of life of people with MD
-