4.6 Article

Quantifying Diplopia with a Questionnaire

Journal

OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 120, Issue 7, Pages 1492-1496

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.12.032

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [EY018810]
  2. Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, New York
  3. Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To report a diplopia questionnaire (DQ) with a data-driven scoring algorithm. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants: To optimize questionnaire scoring, 147 adults with diplopic strabismus completed both the DQ and the Adult Strabismus-20 (AS-20) health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaire. To assess test-retest reliability, 117 adults with diplopic strabismus. To assess responsiveness to surgery, 42 adults (46 surgeries). Methods: The 10-item AS-20 function subscale score (scored 0-100) was defined as the gold standard for severity. A range of weights was assigned to the responses and the gaze positions (from equal weighting to greater weighting of primary and reading). Combining all response option weights with all gaze position weights yielded 382 848 scoring algorithms. We then calculated 382 848 Spearman rank correlation coefficients comparing each algorithm with the AS-20 function subscale score. Main Outcome Measures: To optimize scoring, Spearman rank correlation coefficients (measuring agreement) between DQ scores and AS-20 function subscale scores. For test-retest reliability, 95% limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For responsiveness, change in DQ score. Results: For the 382 848 possible scoring algorithms, correlations with AS-20 function subscale score ranged from -0.64 (best correlated) to -0.55. The best-correlated algorithm had response option weights of 5 for rarely, 50 for sometimes, and 75 for often, and gaze position weights of 40 for straight ahead in the distance, 40 for reading, 1 for up, 8 for down, 4 for right, 4 for left, and 3 for other, totaling 100. There was excellent test-retest reliability with an ICC of 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.92), and 95% limits of agreement were 30.9 points. The DQ score was responsive to surgery with a mean change of 51 +/- 34 (p<0.001). Conclusions: We have developed a data-driven scoring algorithm for the DQ, rating diplopia symptoms from 0 to 100. On the basis of correlations with HRQOL, straight-ahead and reading positions should be highly weighted. The DQ has excellent test-retest reliability and responsiveness, and may be useful in both clinical and research settings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available