Self-reported visual dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: new data from the VFQ-25 and development of an MS-specific vision questionnaire - 02/09/11
: MSCEAbstract |
PURPOSE: To examine vision-specific health-related quality of life in a cohort of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) using the 25-Item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25), and to identify content areas for a brief MS-specific vision questionnaire.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
METHODS: The VFQ-25 and a modified version of the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial (ONTT) Patient Questionnaire were administered by in-person interview to 80 patients at the University of Pennsylvania MS Center. Binocular visual acuities were obtained following a standard protocol using retroilluminated Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts.
RESULTS: Despite a median binocular visual acuity of 20/16 (20/12.5–20/250), VFQ-25 subscale scores in the MS cohort were significantly lower (worse) compared with those of a published reference group of eye disease-free patients (P = .0001–0.009, two-tailed t tests). Rank-correlations of VFQ-25 composite (overall) scores with visual acuity were modest, but significant (rs = 0.33, P = .003), supporting construct validity for VFQ-25 scores in MS populations. Seven additional aspects of self-reported visual dysfunction in MS were also identified.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MS have a high degree of self-reported visual dysfunction that is not entirely captured by visual acuity. The VFQ-25 is an effective measure of self-reported visual loss in MS. A brief MS-specific vision questionnaire may provide additional useful information when administered concurrently with the VFQ-25 in future investigations of MS and other neuroophthalmologic disorders.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
| This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant EY 00351, Bethesda, Maryland (Dr. Balcer) and National Multiple Sclerosis Society Research Grant RG 3208-A-1, New York, New York (Drs. Balcer, Shea, and Maguire). |
Vol 133 - N° 5
P. 686-692 - mai 2002 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
