J E Woudstra-de Jong, J J Busschbach, S S Manning-Charalampidou, J R Vingerling, K Pesudovs
{"title":"玻璃体界面紊乱的患者报告结果评估:系统性文献综述。","authors":"J E Woudstra-de Jong, J J Busschbach, S S Manning-Charalampidou, J R Vingerling, K Pesudovs","doi":"10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.08.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess the impact of disease on quality of life from the patient's perspective. Our purpose was to provide an overview of current PROMs used for vitreomacular interface disorders: macular hole, epiretinal membrane, and vitreomacular traction. We review the content coverage of all identified PROMs, assess them against quality-of-life issues as identified from earlier qualitative studies, and assess their psychometric quality (measurement properties). We identified 86 studies that used a PROM and 2 qualitative studies on quality of life of patients with a vitreomacular interface disorder. Current PROMs used in vitreomacular interface disorders have a limited content coverage and unknown psychometric quality. The National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire was used most. None of the condition-specific PROMs used patient consultation during content development, and there is only a small overlap between the content of PROMs and quality-of-life issues in qualitative studies. Reporting of psychometric quality was sparse, and mostly limited to concurrent validity and responsiveness. There is a need for properly developed and validated PROMs in vitreomacular interface disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":22102,"journal":{"name":"Survey of ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in vitreomacular interface disorders: A systematic literature review.\",\"authors\":\"J E Woudstra-de Jong, J J Busschbach, S S Manning-Charalampidou, J R Vingerling, K Pesudovs\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.08.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess the impact of disease on quality of life from the patient's perspective. Our purpose was to provide an overview of current PROMs used for vitreomacular interface disorders: macular hole, epiretinal membrane, and vitreomacular traction. We review the content coverage of all identified PROMs, assess them against quality-of-life issues as identified from earlier qualitative studies, and assess their psychometric quality (measurement properties). We identified 86 studies that used a PROM and 2 qualitative studies on quality of life of patients with a vitreomacular interface disorder. Current PROMs used in vitreomacular interface disorders have a limited content coverage and unknown psychometric quality. The National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire was used most. None of the condition-specific PROMs used patient consultation during content development, and there is only a small overlap between the content of PROMs and quality-of-life issues in qualitative studies. Reporting of psychometric quality was sparse, and mostly limited to concurrent validity and responsiveness. There is a need for properly developed and validated PROMs in vitreomacular interface disorders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Survey of ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Survey of ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.08.004\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Survey of ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.08.004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in vitreomacular interface disorders: A systematic literature review.
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess the impact of disease on quality of life from the patient's perspective. Our purpose was to provide an overview of current PROMs used for vitreomacular interface disorders: macular hole, epiretinal membrane, and vitreomacular traction. We review the content coverage of all identified PROMs, assess them against quality-of-life issues as identified from earlier qualitative studies, and assess their psychometric quality (measurement properties). We identified 86 studies that used a PROM and 2 qualitative studies on quality of life of patients with a vitreomacular interface disorder. Current PROMs used in vitreomacular interface disorders have a limited content coverage and unknown psychometric quality. The National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire was used most. None of the condition-specific PROMs used patient consultation during content development, and there is only a small overlap between the content of PROMs and quality-of-life issues in qualitative studies. Reporting of psychometric quality was sparse, and mostly limited to concurrent validity and responsiveness. There is a need for properly developed and validated PROMs in vitreomacular interface disorders.
期刊介绍:
Survey of Ophthalmology is a clinically oriented review journal designed to keep ophthalmologists up to date. Comprehensive major review articles, written by experts and stringently refereed, integrate the literature on subjects selected for their clinical importance. Survey also includes feature articles, section reviews, book reviews, and abstracts.