Health-related quality of life following blind rehabilitation

Kuyk, Thomas; Liu, Lei; Elliott, Jeffry L.; Grubbs, Hartley E.; Owsley, Cynthia; McGwin, Gerald; Griffin, Russell; Fuhr, Patti S.

doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9336-3

Cited by 41 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…88 A greater improvement in almost all subscales of NEI-VFQ 25 was seen at 2 compared with 6 months, but the difference was small (effect size 0.59 at 2 months and 0.55 at 6 months). Kuyk et al found a larger effect size than Stelmack et al, who also evaluated a Veterans' Affairs inpatients service using the same outcome measure, but followed up immediately after the end of rehabilitation.…”

Section: Figure 2 About Herementioning

confidence: 83%

“…Kuyk et al showed a moderate increase in vision-related QoL (NEI-VFQ 25) after a very intensive inpatient service treating male veterans who were legally blind. 88 The composite score effect size was 0.59 and 0.55 at 2 and 6 months follow-up respectively. The near vision subscale effect size was greatest (1.49 and 1.44 effect size at 2 and 6 months respectively).…”

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Vision-related Quality Of Lifementioning

confidence: 89%

“…138 The greater effect sizes found in comparison to those reported by studies using vision related quality-of-life tools to assess the same type of Veterans' Affairs low vision service (e.g. 88,137 ) suggest that outcome measures targeting visual function may be more sensitive to the benefits of this type of service. Although these findings indicate that the VA LV VFQ-48 outcome measure is sensitive to the effects of the Veterans' Affairs services, 138,141,143 which tend to be intensive, multidisciplinary services whose patient base is almost exclusively male, it is less clear whether similar effect sizes will be found using this tool to assess the outcomes of other types of service.…”

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Visual Function and Activitiementioning

confidence: 97%

“…Implementation immediately after discharge from the service is one approach, 140 while others choose to obtain post-test data several months after the conclusion of the rehabilitation process. 88,89 The timing of the follow up outcome measure is important because improvements in the trait being assessed resulting from low vision service provision may be offset by a deterioration in visual function caused by pathology progression.…”

Section: Outcome Measures For Assessing the Effectiveness Of A Sermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…143 The NEI-VFQ 51 and 25 item questionnaires 98 have also been widely used in assessing the effectiveness of low vision intervention, and were employed by a number of studies in this review. 88,89,92,126,129,137,140 Both versions of the tool contain functional and more general QoL subscales. Kuyk et al showed a moderate increase in vision-related QoL (NEI-VFQ 25) after a very intensive inpatient service treating male veterans who were legally blind.…”

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Vision-related Quality Of Lifementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

How Effective is Low Vision Service Provision? A Systematic Review

Binns

Bunce

Dickinson

et al. 2012

Survey of Ophthalmology

204

209

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the unspecified version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link Abstract.Visual impairment is a large and growing socioeconomic problem. Good evidence on rehabilitation outcomes is required to guide service development and improve the lives of people with sight loss.Of the 478 potentially relevant articles identified, only 58 studies met our liberal inclusion criteria, and of these only 7 were randomized controlled trials. Although the literature is sufficient to confirm that rehabilitation services result in improved clinical and functional ability outcomes, the effects on mood, vision-related quality of life (QoL) and health-related QoL are less clear. There are some good data on the performance of particular types of intervention, but almost no useful data about outcomes in children, those of working age and other minority groups. There were no reports on cost effectiveness. Overall, the number of well designed and adequately reported studies is pitifully small; visual rehabilitation research needs higher quality research. We highlight study design and reporting considerations and suggest a future research agenda.

show abstract

Section: Figure 2 About Herementioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Vision-related Quality Of Lifementioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Visual Function and Activitiementioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Outcome Measures For Assessing the Effectiveness Of A Sermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effect Of Rehabilitation On Vision-related Quality Of Lifementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How Effective is Low Vision Service Provision? A Systematic Review

Binns

Bunce

Dickinson

et al. 2012

Survey of Ophthalmology

204

209

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Public Attitudes About Eye and Vision Health

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Understanding the importance of eye health to the US population across ethnic and racial groups helps guide strategies to preserve vision in Americans and inform policy makers regarding priority of eye research to Americans. OBJECTIVE To understand the importance and awareness of eye health in the US population across ethnic and racial groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Online nationwide poll created by experienced policy makers in August 2014 designed to understand the importance of eye health in the US population, although the poll was not subjected previously to formal construct-validity testing. The population survey comprised 2044 US adults including non-Hispanic white individuals and minority groups with minority oversampling to provide predicted margins of error no greater than 5%. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Respondent attitudes on the importance of eye health, concerns about losing vision, support for eye health research, and awareness of eye diseases and risk factors. RESULTS Of the 2044 survey respondents, the weighten mean age was 46.2 years, 48% were male, and 11% were uninsured. Sixty three percent reported wearing glasses. Most individuals surveyed (87.5%; 95% CI, 84.5%-90%) believed that good vision is vital to overall health while 47.4% (95% CI, 43.7%-51.1%) rated losing vision as the worst possible health outcome. Respondents ranked losing vision as equal to or worse than losing hearing, memory, speech, or a limb. When asked about various possible consequences of vision loss, quality of life ranked as the top concern followed by loss of independence. Nearly two-thirds of respondents were aware of cataracts (65.8%) or glaucoma (63.4%); only half were aware of macular degeneration; 37.3% were aware of diabetic retinopathy; and 25% were not aware of any eye conditions. Approximately 75.8% and 58.3%, respectively, identified sunlight and family heritage as risk factors for losing vision; only half were aware of smoking risks on vision loss. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this well-characterized survey across all US ethnic and racial groups, vision health was a priority with high support for ongoing research for vision and eye health. Many Americans were unaware of important eye diseases and their behavioral or familial risk factors. The consistency of these findings among the varying ethnic/racial groups underscores the importance of educating the public on eye health and mobilizing public support for vision research.

show abstract