M M Brown1, G C Brown, S Sharma, B Busbee, H Brown. 1. Center for Evidence-Based Health Care Economics, 1107 Bethlehem Pike, Suite 210, Flourtown, PA 19031, USA. Lissa1011@aol.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain with patient preference-based methodology whether individuals with good visual acuity (20/20-20/25) in one eye have the same quality of life as individuals with good vision in both eyes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparative study. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients seen in comprehensive ophthalmic and vitreoretinal practices with known ocular disease and good visual acuity (20/20 or 20/25) in one or both eyes. METHODS: Standardized patient interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time tradeoff and utility analysis values. RESULTS: The mean time tradeoff utility value in 81 patients with good visual acuity in one eye was 0.89 (standard deviation, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.93), whereas the mean value in 66 patients with good vision in both eyes was 0.97 (standard deviation, 0.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-0.99). The difference between the means of the utility values in these two groups was significant using multiple linear regression (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From the patient preference-based point of view, individuals with ocular disease and good visual acuity in both eyes appear to have a higher time tradeoff utility value, and thus a better associated quality of life, than those with good visual acuity in only one eye.
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain with patient preference-based methodology whether individuals with good visual acuity (20/20-20/25) in one eye have the same quality of life as individuals with good vision in both eyes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparative study. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients seen in comprehensive ophthalmic and vitreoretinal practices with known ocular disease and good visual acuity (20/20 or 20/25) in one or both eyes. METHODS: Standardized patient interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time tradeoff and utility analysis values. RESULTS: The mean time tradeoff utility value in 81 patients with good visual acuity in one eye was 0.89 (standard deviation, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.93), whereas the mean value in 66 patients with good vision in both eyes was 0.97 (standard deviation, 0.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-0.99). The difference between the means of the utility values in these two groups was significant using multiple linear regression (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From the patient preference-based point of view, individuals with ocular disease and good visual acuity in both eyes appear to have a higher time tradeoff utility value, and thus a better associated quality of life, than those with good visual acuity in only one eye.
Authors: Willi Horner-Johnson; Rie Suzuki; Gloria L Krahn; Elena M Andresen; Charles E Drum Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Gary C Brown; Melissa M Brown; Sanjay Sharma; Joshua D Stein; Zachary Roth; Joseph Campanella; George R Beauchamp Journal: Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc Date: 2005
Authors: Eric B Bass; Marsha J Marsh; Carol M Mangione; Neil M Bressler; Ashley L Childs; Li Ming Dong; Barbara S Hawkins; Harris A Jaffee; Päivi Miskala Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2004-12