4.6 Article

Changes in the quality-of-life of people with keratoconus

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 145, 期 4, 页码 611-617

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.11.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [L30 EY015148, L30 EY015148-02, U10 EY012656, EY10069, P30 EY002687, EY10077, U10 EY010069, U10 EY010077, EY2687, EY12656, U10 EY010419, P30 EY002687-319001, U10 EY010077-10S1, EY10419] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: The Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus Study (CLEK) previously showed that people with keratoconus report significantly impaired vision-related quality-of-life (V-QoL), as measured on the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ), similar to that of people who have severe macular degeneration. For this study, we evaluated changes that occurred in V-QoL over seven years of follow-up. DESIGN: In this prospective cohort study of 1,166 participants followed up for seven years, we estimated change in V-QoL by projecting the slope of a minimum of three reports on 11 scales of the NEI-VFQ. Correlation with clinical indicators was evaluated, and differences were assessed between those who had clinically signifi- cant changes in clinical factors and those who did not. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with a decline in 10 points or more in a scale score over seven years. RESULTS: All scales showed modest decline except ocular pain and mental health. Baseline factors were not associated with longitudinal change in NEI-VFQ scores. A 10,letter decline in high-contrast binocular visual acuity or a 3.00-diopter increase in corneal curvature were asso ciated with significantly larger declines in V-QoL. In multivariate analysis, these factors also were found to be associated with a 10-point decline in NEI-VFQ scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: Keratoconus is associated with sig. nificantly impaired V-QoL that continues to decline over time. For a substantial plurality of patients, these declines are significant.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据