Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research: a systematic review of vision instruments

Purpose To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. Methods MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Quality of life research 2011-09, Vol.20 (7), p.1141-1158
Main Authors: Hamzah, Jemaima Che, Burr, Jennifer M., Ramsay, Craig R., Azuara-Blanco, Augusto, Prior, Maria
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitude surveys
Choice Behavior
Clinical outcomes
Clinical trials
Disabilities
Ethnolinguistics
Eyes
Glaucoma
Humans
Medical research
Medications
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Ophthalmology
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
Patient satisfaction
Patients
Print media
Public Health
Quality of life
Quality of Life Research
Questionnaires
REVIEW
Self Report
Side effects
Sociology
Surveys and Questionnaires
Systematic review
Validation studies
Validity
Visual impairment
Visual perception
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. Methods MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content. Results Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment. Conclusion This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.
ISSN:0962-9343
1573-2649
DOI:10.1007/s11136-010-9831-1