4.6 Article

Self-reported visual dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: New data from the VFQ-25 and development of an MS-specific vision questionnaire

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 133, Issue 5, Pages 686-692

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01337-5

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY00351] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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 (r(s) = 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. 0 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.

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