Assessment of the Psychometric Properties of a Questionnaire Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes With Laser In Situ Keratomileusis (PROWL)

被引:31
作者
Hays, Ron D. [1 ,2 ]
Tarver, Michelle E. [2 ]
Spritzer, Karen L. [1 ]
Reise, Steve [3 ]
Hilmantel, Gene [2 ]
Hofmeister, Elizabeth M. [4 ]
Hammel, Keri [5 ]
May, Jeanine [5 ]
Ferris, Frederick, III [6 ]
Eydelman, Malvina [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Med, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[2] US FDA, Ctr Devices & Radiol Hlth, 10993 New Hampshire Ave,Bldg 66,Room 2410, Silver Spring, MD 20993 USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Psychol, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[4] Naval Med Ctr San Diego, Navy Refract Surg Ctr, Dept Ophthalmol, San Diego, CA USA
[5] Emmes Corp, Rockville, MD USA
[6] NEI, Div Epidemiol & Clin Applicat, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
关键词
INSTITUTE-REFRACTIVE ERROR; OF-LIFE INSTRUMENT; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; ANXIETY; SCALE;
D O I
10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.4597
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
IMPORTANCE Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures for laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) are needed. OBJECTIVE To develop PRO measures to assess satisfaction, eye-related symptoms, and their effect on functioning and well-being following LASIK based on patient and expert input. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Patient-Reported Outcomes With LASIK (PROWL) studies were prospective observational studies of patients undergoing LASIK surgery for myopia, hyperopia, or astigmatism. PROWL-1 was a single-center study of active-duty US Navy personnel and PROWL-2 was a 5-center study of civilians. PROWL-1 enrolled 262 active-duty service personnel and PROWL-2 enrolled 312 civilians 21 years or older who spoke English; 241 individuals in PROWL-1 and 280 in PROWL-2 completed a baseline questionnaire before surgery. The analytic sample included those also completing 1 or more follow-up questionnaires: 240 (99.6%) of those in PROWL-1 and 271 (94.4%) of those in PROWL-2. Questionnaires were self-administered through the internet preoperatively and at 1 and 3 months postoperatively in both studies and at 6 months postoperatively in PROWL-1. PROWL-1 began in August 2011 and was completed May 30, 2014; PROWL-2 began in July 2012 and was completed June 27, 2014. Data were analyzed from June 28, 2014, to October 24, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Scales assessing visual symptoms (double images, glare, halos, and starbursts), dry eye symptoms, satisfaction with vision, and satisfaction with LASIK surgery. Items from the National Eye Institute (NEI) Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument (NEI-RQL-42), NEI Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ), and the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) were included. All scales are scored on a 0 to 100possible range. Construct validity and responsiveness to change were evaluated (comparing scores before and after surgery). RESULTS The median age of the 240-person PROWL-1 analytic sample was 27 years (range, 21-52 years); 49 were women (20.4%). The median age of the 271-person PROWL-2 analytic sample was 30 years (range, 21-57 years); 147 were women (54.2%). Internal consistency reliabilities for the 4 visual symptom scales ranged from 0.96 to 0.98 in PROWL-1 and from 0.95 to 0.97 in PROWL-2. The median (interquartile range) test-retest intraclass correlation was 0.69 (0.57-0.79) and 0.76 (0.68-0.84) in PROWL-1 and PROWL-2, respectively. Product-moment correlations of satisfaction with surgery with visual symptom scales at follow-up evaluations ranged from r = 0.24 to r = 0.49. Measures improved from baseline to follow-up, with effect sizes of 0.14 to 1.98, but scores on the NEI-RQL-42 glare scale worsened at the 1-month follow-up. Hours of work did not change significantly from baseline to 1-month follow-up, with the mean number (mean [SD] difference) in PROWL-1 of 41.7 vs 40.9 hours (-0.8[18.7]) and in PROWL-2 of 38.8 vs 38.2 hours (-0.6 [17.1]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The results of these studies support the reliability and validity of visual symptom scales to evaluate the effects of LASIK surgery in future studies.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 12
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, DOI DOI 10.1001/JAMA.2013.281053
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1978, Psychometric theory
[3]  
[Anonymous], WASHINGTON POST
[4]   Functional Outcome and Patient Satisfaction after Laser In Situ Keratomileusis for Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism [J].
Bamashmus, Mahfouth A. ;
Hubaish, Khammash ;
Alawad, Mohammed ;
Alakhlee, Hisham .
MIDDLE EAST AFRICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2015, 22 (01) :108-114
[5]   Web-based versus Paper Administration of Common Ophthalmic Questionnaires Comparison of Subscale Scores [J].
Clayton, Janine Austin ;
Eydelman, Malvina ;
Vitale, Susan ;
Manukyan, Zorayr ;
Kramm, Robert ;
Datiles, Manuel, III ;
Temple, Alana ;
Murphy, Elizabeth ;
Kim, Jonghyeon ;
Hilmantel, Gene ;
Rorer, Eva ;
Hammel, Keri ;
Ferris, Frederick, III .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 120 (10) :2151-2159
[6]   Development and validation of a multidimensional quality-of-life scale for myopia [J].
Erickson, DB ;
Stapleton, F ;
Erickson, P ;
Du Toit, R ;
Gunnakopoulos, E ;
Holden, B .
OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2004, 81 (02) :70-81
[7]   What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures? [J].
Frost, Marlene H. ;
Reeve, Bryce B. ;
Liepa, Astra M. ;
Stauffer, Joseph W. ;
Hays, Ron D. ;
Sloan, Jeff A. .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2007, 10 :S94-S105
[8]   Prospects and challenges in using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice [J].
Fung, Constance H. ;
Hays, Ron D. .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2008, 17 (10) :1297-1302
[9]   Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument [J].
Hays, RD ;
Mangione, CM ;
Ellwein, L ;
Lindblad, AS ;
Spritzer, KL ;
McDonnell, PJ .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2003, 110 (12) :2292-2301
[10]   BEYOND INTERNAL CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY - RATIONALE AND USERS GUIDE FOR MULTITRAIT ANALYSIS PROGRAM ON THE MICROCOMPUTER [J].
HAYS, RD ;
HAYASHI, T .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 1990, 22 (02) :167-175