临床研究
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
中文版视功能指数量表在日常低视力白内障手术患者中的应用价值评估
陈海丝
黄锦海
高蓉蓉
叶俊明
陈敏
王勤美
作者及单位信息
·
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115985-20190930-00426
Application of Chinese VF-11R questionnaire in presenting low vision cataract patients undergoing surgery
Chen Haisi
Huang Jinhai
Gao Rongrong
Ye Junming
Chen Min
Wang Qinmei
Authors Info & Affiliations
Chen Haisi
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
Huang Jinhai
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
Gao Rongrong
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
Ye Junming
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
Chen Min
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
Wang Qinmei
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
·
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115985-20190930-00426
0
0
0
0
0
0
PDF下载
APP内阅读
摘要

目的结合校标法和分布法以计算中文版视功能指数量表(VF-11R-CN)用于日常低视力白内障人群围手术期的最小临床意义差异(MCID),基于MCID值比较不同特点人群术后视觉相关生活质量(VRQol)的改善率。

方法采用横断面研究方法,纳入2018年5月至2019年6月在温州医科大学附属眼视光医院收治的术前日常低视力白内障患者98例,所有患者均接受白内障超声乳化联合人工晶状体植入术,分别于术前和术后1~3个月行VF-11R-CN量表调查,且术后调查时增加校标条目。通过天花板效应和地板效应、术前术后的得分差异和效应值来评估VF-11R-CN量表的适用性。分布法测定MCID值时采用0.5个标准差(SD)和1.96个测量标准误(SEM)进行估算,校标法测定MCID值时采用线性回归分析法进行估算。在应答者分析中计算MCID的敏感性和特异性,对不同特点人群基于MCID值的VRQol提高率进行比较。

结果共85例受试者完成随访。受试者围手术期VF-11R-CN量表得分变化为(399.51±234.92)分,视力变化为(0.65±0.36)。量表术前的天花板和地板效应均为1.18%,术后地板效应为22.35%。受试者术前VF-11R-CN量表总分高于术后,差异有统计学意义( t=15.68, P<0.001),VF-11R-CN量表的效应值为1.63。基于0.5个SD和1.96个SEM的MCID估值分别为122.23分和123.10分;校标条目的得分增加1分,围手术期得分变化下降106.17分。平均化分布法和回归分析法得到的MCID值为117.17分。受试者中术后得分超过MCID值者76例,占89.41%,MCID值的灵敏度为96.67%,特异性为46.67%。不同性别间、单种眼病与多种眼病间及手术前视力(以LogMAR 1.3为界)间术后VRQol提高率差异均无统计学意义( P=0.73、0.88、0.27)。

结论VF-11R-CN量表适用于中国日常低视力白内障手术人群术后生活质量的客观评估,手术的MCID估值为117.17分,MCID估值敏感性高,特异性偏低。

白内障/手术;中文版视功能指数量表;低视力;视觉相关生活质量;最小临床意义差异
ABSTRACT

ObjectiveTo assess the applying value of Chinese shorter version of the Visual Function Index questionnaire (VF-11R-CN) for presenting low-vision cataract pre-operation and post-operation by using minimal clinically important difference (MCID) determined by combination of distribution-based with anchor-based methods, and to compare the improvement rate of vision-related quality of life (VRQol).

MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed in this study.Ninety-eight patients with presenting low vision cataract were enrolled at Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University from May 2018 to June 2019.All the patients received a phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation.A questionnaire survey was carried out with VF-11R-CN Scale before surgery and 1 month-3 months after surgery, and a complement anchor item was added during the questionnaire after surgery.The applicability of the scale was assessed by floor or ceiling effects, and score difference of the VF-11R-CN over time and effective size was determined.Distribution-based MCID was calculated using 0.5 standard deviation (SD) of score difference and 1.96 standard error of measurement (SEM). Anchor-based MCID was calculated using the slope of the linear regression analysis.In responder analysis, sensitivity and specificity of MCID was reported.The differences of postoperative VRQol improvement rate based-on MCID were compared between male and female, single eye disease and multiple eye diseases, pre-operative and post-operative scores.This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, and followed the Declaration of Helsinki.Written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to any medical examination.

ResultsA total of 85 patients completed the following up.The mean score difference was 399.51±234.92, and that of the presenting visual acuity (PVA) was 0.65±0.36.Both the minor floor and ceiling effects were 1.18% before surgery, and the ceiling effects were 22.35% after surgery.The score before surgery was significantly higher than that after surgery ( t=15.68, P<0.001). The effective size for the surgery was 1.63.The MCID was 122.23 and 123.10 according to 0.5 SD and 1.96 SEM.The linearity regression analysis showed that score difference reduced 106.17 if anchor item option increased 1.The average MCID estimate was 117.17.A total of 76 patients (89.41%) reported an improvement of VRQol.The sensitivity of MCID for the assessment of VRQol was 96.67% and specificity was 46.67%.No significant differences were found in VRQol improvement rate between gender, single cataract and multiple eye diseases or PVA (LogMAR 1.3 as cutoff value) ( P=0.73, 0.88, 0.27).

ConclusionsVF-11R-CN scale is available for Chinese presenting low vision cataract patients undergoing surgery.The MCID value for the cataract surgery is 117.17 scores, with a high sensitivity and a relatively low specificity.

Cataract/surgery;Chinese Shorter Versions of the Visual Function Index Scale;Low vision;Vision-related quality of life;Minimal clinically important difference
Wang Qinmei, Email: nc.defcaab.eye.liam6mqw
引用本文

陈海丝,黄锦海,高蓉蓉,等. 中文版视功能指数量表在日常低视力白内障手术患者中的应用价值评估[J]. 中华实验眼科杂志,2020,38(04):342-347.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115985-20190930-00426

PERMISSIONS

Request permissions for this article from CCC.

评价本文
*以上评分为匿名评价
目前中国的视力受损人群较多,且以白内障为主要原因者较多 [ 1 , 2 ],其中低视力属于中重度视觉损害,影响患者的视觉相关生活质量(vision-related quality of life,VRQol) [ 3 ],正确评估这些低视力患者可为我国的视觉卫生健康评价和防控提供重要依据,有效降低社会和家庭的经济负担 [ 4 ]。对VRQol进行评估的主要工具是视觉功能量表 [ 5 ],其主要评价指标是最小临床意义差异(minimal clinically important difference,MCID)。MCID是视觉功能量表评估的差异具有统计学意义且在临床层面上有意义的最小差异值,美国食品药品监督管理局(Food and Drug Administration,FDA)将MCID确定为临床试验的终点指标之一 [ 6 ]。随着研究方法学的不断发展 [ 7 ],MCID已逐渐用于临床和相关的临床试验 [ 8 , 9 ]。视功能指数量表14(Visual Function Index-14,VF-14)是美国国立眼科研究所开发的眼科生存质量评估工具 [ 10 ],在国内外已经得到较多应用 [ 11 ],经温州医科大学附属眼视光医院研究人员结合我国的人群特点进行修订,通过Rasch分析形成了10条目中文版视功能指数量表(VF-11R-CN) [ 12 ]。本研究验证VF-11R-CN量表在低视力白内障围手术期的应用价值,并结合校标法和分布法建立MCID值,为日常低视力白内障眼治疗前后VRQol提供量化评估方法。
试读结束,您可以通过登录机构账户或个人账户后获取全文阅读权限。
参考文献
[1]
Bourne RRA Flaxman SR Braithwaite T et al. Magnitude,temporal trends,and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J/OL]Lancet Glob Health 20175(9)∶e888-e897[2019-11-29]https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2214-109X(17)30293-0DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30293-0 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[2]
Zhang G Tham YC Gong H et al. Blindness,low vision and cataract surgery outcome among adults in Hohhot of Inner Mongolia:a rapid assessment of avoidable blindness (RAAB) study[J]Br J Ophthalmol 2018102(12)∶1653-1657. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311633 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[3]
Fenwick EK Ong PG Man RE et al. Association of vision impairment and major eye diseases with mobility and independence in a Chinese population[J]JAMA Ophthalmol 2016134(10)∶1087-1093. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.2394 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[4]
Eckert KA Carter MJ Lansingh VC et al. A simple method for estimating the economic cost of productivity loss due to blindness and moderate to severe visual impairment[J]Ophthalmic Epidemiol 201522(5)∶349-355. DOI: 10.3109/09286586.2015.1066394 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[5]
Renaud J Bedard E Depression in the elderly with visual impairment and its association with quality of life[J]Clin Interv Aging 20138931-943. DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S27717 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[6]
Food and Drug Administration. Challenges in clinical trials of SDB devices[EB/OL].[2019-09-22]https://www.fda.gov/media/112585/download.
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[7]
Sedaghat AR . Understanding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of patient-reported outcome measures[J]Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019161(4)∶551-560. DOI: 10.1177/0194599819852604 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[8]
Lescrauwaet B Duchateau L Verstraeten T et al. visual function response to Ocriplasmin for the treatment of vitreomacular traction and macular hole:the OASIS study[J]Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 201758(13)∶5842-5848. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.17-22363 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[9]
Quinten C Kenis C Decoster L et al. Determining clinically important differences in health-related quality of life in older patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy or surgery[J]Qual Life Res 201928(3)∶663-676. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-018-2062-6 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[10]
Pan AP Wang QM Huang F et al. Correlation among lens opacities classification system Ⅲ grading,visual function index-14,pentacam nucleus staging,and objective scatter index for cataract assessment[J]Am J Ophthalmol 2015159(2)∶241-247. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.10.025 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[11]
高蓉蓉郭燕陈海丝中国版视功能指数量表的修订及其在白内障患者生活质量评估中的应用[J]中华实验眼科杂志 201634(9)∶823-828. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-0160.2016.09.011 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
Gao RR Guo Y Chen HS et al. Revision and application of Chinese version of visual function index-14 in the evaluation of life quality cataract patients[J]Chin J Exp Ophthalmol 201634(9)∶823-828. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-0160.2016.09.011 .
Goto CitationGoogle Scholar
Baidu Scholar
Wanfang Data
[12]
Khadka J Huang J Mollazadegan K et al. Translation,cultural adaptation,and Rasch analysis of the visual function (VF-14) questionnaire[J]Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 201455(7)∶4413-4420. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.14-14017 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[13]
王晨晓瞿佳视力表应用常见误解之分析[J]中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志 201517(3)∶129-131. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2015.03.001 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
Wang CX Qu J The analysis of common misunderstandings of recognition and application of visual acuity chart[J]Chin J Optom Ophthalmol Vis Sci 201517(3)∶129-131. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2015.03.001 .
Goto CitationGoogle Scholar
Baidu Scholar
Wanfang Data
[14]
Nangia V Jonas JB George R et al. Prevalence and causes of blindness and vision impairment:magnitude,temporal trends and projections in South and Central Asia[J]Br J Ophthalmol 2019103(7)∶871-877. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312292 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[15]
Sturrock BA Xie J Holloway EE et al. The influence of coping on vision-related quality of life in patients with low vision:a prospective longitudinal study[J]Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 201556(4)∶2416-2422. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.14-16223 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[16]
Chiang PP Zheng Y Wong TY et al. Vision impairment and major causes of vision loss impacts on vision-specific functioning independent of socioeconomic factors[J]Ophthalmology 2013120(2)∶415-422. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.07.077 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[17]
Yang L Shi X Tang X Associations of subjective and objective clinical outcomes of visual functions with quality of life in Chinese glaucoma patients:a cross-sectional study[J]BMC Ophthalmol 201919(1)∶166-172. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-019-1176-0 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[18]
Khadka J Gao R Chen H et al. Re-engineering the Hong Kong Quality of Life Questionnaire to assess cataract surgery outcomes[J]J Refract Surg 201834(6)∶413-418. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20180326-01 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[19]
Bilbao A Quintana JM Escobar A et al. Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the VF-14 index,SF-36,and visual acuity in patients undergoing cataract surgery[J]Ophthalmology 2009116(3)∶418-424. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.020 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[20]
Hwang CJ Ellis R Davis RM et al. Determination of the minimal clinically important difference of the University of North Carolina Dry Eye Management Scale[J]Cornea 201736(9)∶1054-1060. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001287 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[21]
Pesudovs K Wright TA Gothwal VK . Visual disability assessment:valid measurement of activity limitation and mobility in cataract patients[J]Br J Ophthalmol 201094(6)∶777-781. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2009.169490 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[22]
Jayadevappa R Cook R Chhatre S Minimal important difference to infer changes in health-related quality of life-a systematic review[J]J Clin Epidemiol 201789188-198. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.009 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[23]
Engel L Beaton DE Touma Z Minimal clinically important difference:a review of outcome measure score interpretation[J]Rheum Dis Clin North Am 201844(2)∶177-188. DOI: 10.1016/j.rdc.2018.01.011 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[24]
Khadka J Gothwal VK McAlinden C et al. The importance of rating scales in measuring patient-reported outcomes[J]Health Qual Life Outcomes 20121080-85. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-80 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[25]
Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada M Bilbao A Ansola L et al. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire[J]Health Qual Life Outcomes 201917(1)∶36-42. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-019-1104-2 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[26]
Hoehle LP Phillips KM Speth MM et al. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for the EQ-5D in chronic rhinosinusitis[J]Rhinology 201957(2)∶110-116. DOI: 10.4193/Rhin18.122 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[27]
Stipancic KL Yunusova Y Berry JD et al. Minimally detectable change and minimal clinically important difference of a decline in sentence intelligibility and speaking rate for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis[J]J Speech Lang Hear Res 201861(11)∶2757-2771. DOI: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0366 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[28]
Wang SY Stem MS Oren G et al. Patient-centered and visual quality outcomes of premium cataract surgery:a systematic review[J]Eur J Ophthalmol 201727(4)∶387-401. DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000978 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
[29]
Samadi B Lundstrom M Kugelberg M Improving patient-assessed outcomes after cataract surgery[J]Eur J Ophthalmol 201727(4)∶454-459. DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000927 .
返回引文位置Google Scholar
百度学术
万方数据
备注信息
A
王勤美,Email: nc.defcaab.eye.liam6mqw
B
所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突
C
国家卫生计生委科学计划基金-浙江省医药卫生重大科技计划项目 (WKJ-ZJ-1530)
浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目 (2017KY495)
温州市科技局资助项目 (Y20150068、Y20170195)
评论 (0条)
注册
登录
时间排序
暂无评论,发表第一条评论抢沙发
MedAI助手(体验版)
文档即答
智问智答
机器翻译
回答内容由人工智能生成,我社无法保证其准确性和完整性,该生成内容不代表我们的态度或观点,仅供参考。
生成快照
文献快照

你好,我可以帮助您更好的了解本文,请向我提问您关注的问题。

0/2000

《中华医学会杂志社用户协议》 | 《隐私政策》

《SparkDesk 用户协议》 | 《SparkDesk 隐私政策》

网信算备340104764864601230055号 | 网信算备340104726288401230013号

技术支持:

历史对话
本文全部
还没有聊天记录
设置
模式
纯净模式沉浸模式
字号