Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Ophthalmology
Published in: BMC Ophthalmology 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Research article

Measuring benefits and patients' satisfaction when glasses are not needed after cataract and presbyopia surgery: scoring and psychometric validation of the Freedom from Glasses Value Scale (FGVS©)

Authors: Gilles Berdeaux, Juliette Meunier, Benoit Arnould, Muriel Viala-Danten

Published in: BMC Ophthalmology | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to reduce the number of items, create a scoring method and assess the psychometric properties of the Freedom from Glasses Value Scale (FGVS), which measures benefits of freedom from glasses perceived by cataract and presbyopic patients after multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) surgery.

Methods

The 21-item FGVS, developed simultaneously in French and Spanish, was administered by phone during an observational study to 152 French and 152 Spanish patients who had undergone cataract or presbyopia surgery at least 1 year before the study. Reduction of items and creation of the scoring method employed statistical methods (principal component analysis, multitrait analysis) and content analysis. Psychometric properties (validation of the structure, internal consistency reliability, and known-group validity) of the resulting version were assessed in the pooled population and per country.

Results

One item was deleted and 3 were kept but not aggregated in a dimension. The other 17 items were grouped into 2 dimensions ('global evaluation', 9 items; 'advantages', 8 items) and divided into 5 sub-dimensions, with higher scores indicating higher benefit of surgery. The structure was validated (good item convergent and discriminant validity). Internal consistency reliability was good for all dimensions and sub-dimensions (Cronbach's alphas above 0.70). The FGVS was able to discriminate between patients wearing glasses or not after surgery (higher scores for patients not wearing glasses). FGVS scores were significantly higher in Spain than France; however, the measure had similar psychometric performances in both countries.

Conclusions

The FGVS is a valid and reliable instrument measuring benefits of freedom from glasses perceived by cataract and presbyopic patients after multifocal IOL surgery.
Literature
1.
Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya'ale D, Kocur I, Pararajasegaram R, Pokharel GP, Mariotti SP: Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ. 2004, 82: 844-851.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Luo BP, Brown GC, Luo SC, Brown MM: The quality of life associated with presbyopia. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008, 145: 618-622. 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.12.011.CrossRefPubMed
3.
McDonnell PJ, Lee P, Spritzer K, Lindblad AS, Hays RD: Associations of presbyopia with vision-targeted health-related quality of life. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003, 121: 1577-1581. 10.1001/archopht.121.11.1577.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Oshika T, Sugita G, Hayashi K, Eguchi S, Miyata K, Kozawa T, Oki K: [Influence of cataract and intraocular lens surgery on health-related quality of life]. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 2005, 109: 753-760.PubMed
5.
Canadanovic V, Latinovic S, Babic N, Babovic S, Zikic Z, Ljesevic L, Grkovic D, Bedov T: Quality of Life in Patients with Cataract VQOL Study Group Report. Patient Reported Outcomes Newsletter. 1994, 23-24.
6.
Knudtson MD, Klein BE, Klein R, Cruickshanks KJ, Lee KE: Age-related eye disease, quality of life, and functional activity. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005, 123: 807-814. 10.1001/archopht.123.6.807.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Tewari A, Shah GK: Presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: what retinal surgeons should know. Retina. 2008, 28: 535-537. 10.1097/IAE.0b013e31816697a9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
Berdeaux G, Viala M, Roborel de CA, Arnould B: Patient-reported benefit of ReSTOR multi-focal intraocular lenses after cataract surgery: results of principal component analysis on clinical trial data. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008, 6: 10-CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Cabezas-Leon M, Gracia-San RJ, Garcia-Caballero J, Morente-Matas P: [Quality of life following cataract surgery]. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2005, 80: 449-456. 10.4321/S0365-66912005000800005.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Cabezas-Leon M, Garcia-Caballero J, Morente-Matas P: [Impact of cataract surgery on visual acuity and quality of life]. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2008, 83: 237-247. 10.4321/S0365-66912008000400006.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Chandrasekaran S, Wang JJ, Rochtchina E, Mitchell P: Change in health-related quality of life after cataract surgery in a population-based sample. Eye. 2008, 22: 479-484. 10.1038/sj.eye.6702854.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Chiam PJ, Chan JH, Aggarwal RK, Kasaby S: ReSTOR intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery: quality of vision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006, 32: 1459-1463. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.04.015.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pesudovs K, Weisinger HS, Coster DJ: Cataract surgery and changes in quality of life measures. Clin Exp Optom. 2003, 86: 34-41. 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2003.tb03055.x.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Souza CE, Muccioli C, Soriano ES, Chalita MR, Oliveira F, Freitas LL, Meire LP, Tamaki C, Belfort R: Visual performance of AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive IOL: a prospective comparative trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006, 141: 827-832. 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.12.031.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Bi H, Cui Y, Ma X, Cai W, Wang G, Ji P, Xie X: Early clinical evaluation of AcrySof ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lens for treatment of cataract. Ophthalmologica. 2008, 222: 11-16. 10.1159/000109272.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Blaylock JF, Si Z, Vickers C: Visual and refractive status at different focal distances after implantation of the ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006, 32: 1464-1473. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.04.011.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Kohnen T, Allen D, Boureau C, Dublineau P, Hartmann C, Mehdorn E, Rozot P, Tassinari G: European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens. Ophthalmology. 2006, 113: 584-10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.11.020.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Souza CE, Gerente VM, Chalita MR, Soriano ES, Freitas LL, Belfort R: Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, reading speed, and wavefront analysis: pseudophakic eye with multifocal IOL (ReSTOR) versus fellow phakic eye in non-presbyopic patients. J Refract Surg. 2006, 22: 303-305.PubMed
21.
Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Senaris A, Montes-Mico R: Prospective study of the Acri. LISA bifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007, 33: 1930-1935. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.06.067.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Alio JL, Tavolato M, De la HF, Claramonte P, Rodriguez-Prats JL, Galal A: Near vision restoration with refractive lens exchange and pseudoaccommodating and multifocal refractive and diffractive intraocular lenses: comparative clinical study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004, 30: 2494-2503. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.04.052.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Cillino S, Casuccio A, Di PF, Morreale R, Pillitteri F, Cillino G, Lodato G: One-year outcomes with new-generation multifocal intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2008, 115: 1508-1516. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.017.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Mester U, Hunold W, Wesendahl T, Kaymak H: Functional outcomes after implantation of Tecnis ZM900 and Array SA40 multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007, 33: 1033-1040. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.02.037.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Montes-Mico R, Alio JL: Distance and near contrast sensitivity function after multifocal intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003, 29: 703-711. 10.1016/S0886-3350(02)01648-6.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Javitt JC, Wang F, Trentacost DJ, Rowe M, Tarantino N: Outcomes of cataract extraction with multifocal intraocular lens implantation: functional status and quality of life. Ophthalmology. 1997, 104: 589-599.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, Javitt JC, Sharkey P, Cassard SD, Legro MW, Diener-West M, BASS EB, Damiano AM, et al: The VF-14: An Index of Functional Impairment in Patients with Cataract. Archives of Ophthalmology. 1994, 112: 630-638.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB: The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) Questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci. 2004, 81: 769-777. 10.1097/00006324-200410000-00009.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB: The Contact Lens Impact on Quality of Life (CLIQ) Questionnaire: development and validation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006, 47: 2789-2796. 10.1167/iovs.05-0933.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Day H, Jutai J, Campbell KA: Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2002, 24: 31-37. 10.1080/09638280110066343.CrossRefPubMed
31.
32.
Hays RD, Hayashi T: Beyond internal consistency reliability: rationale and user's guide for Multitrait analysis program on the microcomputer. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1990, 22: 167-175.CrossRef
33.
Cronbach LJ: Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika. 1951, 16: 297-334. 10.1007/BF02310555.CrossRef
34.
Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH: Psychometric theory. 1994, New York: McGraw-Hill Inc
35.
Paulhus DL: Measurement and control of response bias. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. Edited by: Robinson JP, Shaver P, Wrightsman LS. 1991, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1: 17-59.CrossRef
36.
Bentler PM, Jackson DN, Messick S: Identification of content and style: a two-dimensional interpretation of acquiescence. Psychol Bull. 1971, 76: 186-204. 10.1037/h0031474.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Schuman H, Presser S: Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. 1981, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
38.
van Herk H, Poortinga YH, Verhallen TMM: Response styles in rating scales: evidence of method bias in data from six EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2004, 25: 346-360. 10.1177/0022022104264126.CrossRef
39.
Hofstede GH: Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. 2001, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
40.
Johnson T, Kulesa P, Llc I, Cho YI, Shavitt S: The relation between culture and response styles: evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2005, 36: 264-277. 10.1177/0022022104272905.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Measuring benefits and patients' satisfaction when glasses are not needed after cataract and presbyopia surgery: scoring and psychometric validation of the Freedom from Glasses Value Scale (FGVS©)
Authors
Gilles Berdeaux
Juliette Meunier
Benoit Arnould
Muriel Viala-Danten
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2415
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-10-15

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

BMC Ophthalmology 1/2010 Go to the issue

Research article

Refractive ocular conditions and reasons for spectacles renewal in a resource-limited economy

Case report

Peripheral capillary non-perfusion in asymptomatic Waldenström's macroglobulinemia

Research article

Comparison of the biometric values obtained by two different A-mode ultrasound devices (Eye Cubed vs. PalmScan): A Transversal, descriptive, and comparative study

Case report

Macular hole formation, progression, and surgical repair: case series of serial optical coherence tomography and time lapse morphing video study

Research article

Expression of connexin genes in the human retina

Research article

Scoring and psychometric properties of the Eye-Drop Satisfaction Questionnaire (EDSQ), an instrument to assess satisfaction and compliance with glaucoma treatment