| Literature DB >> 25330252 |
Qihua Le1, Xinhan Cui2, Jun Xiang2, Ling Ge3, Lan Gong4, Jianjiang Xu4.
Abstract
Conjunctivochalasis (Cch) is a very common ocular disorder, which can cause an unstable tear film and ocular discomfort. The study of vision-related quality of life (VR-QoL) in a community population with Cch can provide a better understanding of the impact of Cch on common people than objective clinical examinations alone. This cross-sectional comparative study enrolled 360 participants ≥ 40 years old living in Sanle Community, Shanghai. In the study, 198 subjects were diagnosed with Cch and 86 with dry eye syndrome (DES) without Cch. The remaining 76 subjects were normal controls. Socio-demographical data were collected, and Cch and related ocular symptoms and signs were evaluated. In addition, all participants were required to complete the Chinese version of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) and Ocular Surface Disease Index Questionnaire (OSDI). Main outcome measures include the comparison on the OSDI score and VFQ-25 score among the subgroups, and the correlation of these scores with the socio-demographical and clinical data. The results revealed that subjects with Cch had significantly decreased tear film stability even compared with those with DES (P = 0.001). The participants with either Cch or DES reported significantly higher OSDI scores and lower VFQ-25 composite scores than the normal controls (P<0.001 and 0.007 respectively). Further comparisons among the subgroups of Cch revealed that the following factors were associated with higher OSDI scores and lower VFQ-25 composite scores: nasal-side Cch, chalasis folds higher than tear meniscus height, punctal occlusion, or increased extent of chalasis on digital pressure. In conclusion, Cch was associated with an adverse impact on VR-QoL in a community population, and the impairment in VR-QoL had a significant correlation with disease severity and tear film abnormalities.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25330252 PMCID: PMC4203838 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110821
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1The protocol for the study population selection is shown here.
Additional grading criteria of Cch.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| Folds versus Tear Meniscus Height (H) | 〈tear meniscus | = tear meniscus | >tear meniscus |
| Punctal Occlusion (O) | without punctal occlusion | with punctal occlusion | |
| Changes in Down Gaze (DG) | no difference | height/extent of chalasis increases in downgaze | height/extent of chalasis decreases in downgaze |
| Changes by Digital Pressure (P) | no difference | height/extent of chalasis increases on digital pressure | height/extent of chalasis decreases on digital pressure |
Socio-demographic data of enrolled subjects.
| Cch (n = 198) | DES & non-Cch (n = 86) | normal controls (n = 76) | P value | |
|
| 0.381 | |||
| male | 75 (37.9%) | 32 (37.2%) | 37 (48.7%) | |
| female | 123 (62.1%) | 54 (62.8%) | 39 (51.3%) | |
|
| 0.549 | |||
| average | 64.6±11.6 | 62.8±11.4 | 61.5±9.6 | |
| range | 41–92 | 41–88 | 41–85 | |
|
| 0.376 | |||
| married | 163 (82.3%) | 64 (74.4%) | 56 (73.7%) | |
| single | 32 (17.7%) | 22 (25.6%) | 20 (26.3%) | |
|
| 0.013 | |||
| employed | 38 (19.2%) | 29 (33.7%) a | 19 (25.0%) | |
| unemployed | 3 (1.5%) | 3 (3.5%) | 2 (2.6%) | |
| retired | 157 (79.3%) | 54 (62.8%) | 55 (72.4%) | |
|
| 0.003 † | |||
| illiterate | 8 (4.0%) | 2 (2.3%) | 4 (5.3%) | |
| primary school | 28 (14.1%) | 10 (11.7%) | 8 (10.5%) | |
| middle school | 130 (65.7%) | 66 (76.7%) | 51 (67.1%) | |
| college or above | 32 (16.2%) | 8 (9.3%) b | 13 (17.1%) | |
|
| 0.486 | |||
| non-smokers | 169 (85.4%) | 74 (86.0%) | 69 (90.8%) | |
| smokers | 29 (14.6%) | 12 (14.0%) | 7 (9.2%) | |
|
| 0.533 | |||
| non-drinkers or abstainers | 168 (84.8%) | 72 (83.7%) | 68 (89.5%) | |
| drinkers | 30 (15.2%) | 14 (16.3%) | 8 (10.5%) | |
|
| 0.024 | |||
| >3 h/d | 28 (14.1%) | 15 (17.4%) | 12 (15.8%) | |
| <3 h/d | 39 (19.7%) | 25 (29.1%) | 28 (36.8%) c | |
| not applicable | 131 (66.2%) | 46 (53.5%) | 36 (47.4%) | |
|
| 0.277 | |||
| >3 h/d | 27 (13.6%) | 8 (9.3%) | 6 (7.9%) | |
| <3 h/d | 47 (23.7%) | 16 (18.6%) | 13 (17.1%) | |
| not applicable | 124 (62.6%) | 62 (72.1%) | 57 (75.0%) | |
|
| 0.313 | |||
| >3 h/d | 97 (49.0%) | 45 (52.3%) | 30 (39.5%) | |
| <3 h/d | 92 (46.5%) | 34 (39.6%) | 41 (53.9%) | |
| not applicable | 9 (4.5%) | 7 (8.1%) | 5 (6.6%) |
*: P<0.05, †: P<0.01.
a: Cch VS DES & non-Cch has statistical significance.
b: DES & non-Cch VS the other two groups has statistical significance.
c: Normal control VS Cch has statistical significance.
The clinical characteristics and ocular surface parameters of enrolled subjects.
| Cch (n = 198) | DES & non-Cch (n = 86) | normal controls (n = 76) | P value | ||||
| OD | OS | OD | OS | OD | OS | ||
|
| 0.55±0.21 | 0.51±0.24 | 0.58±0.24 | 0.57±0.23 | 0.55±0.27 | 0.54±0.23 | 0.886 |
|
| <0.001 ‡ | ||||||
| <5 mm | 79 (39.9%) | 80 (40.4%) | 28 (32.6%) | 30 (34.9%) | 0 | 0 | Cch vs DES: 0.051 |
| 5–10 mm | 63 (31.8%) | 59 (29.8%) | 21 (24.4%) | 17 (19.8%) | 25 (32.9%) | 23 (30.3%) | Cch vs Con: <0.001 ‡ |
| >10 mm | 56 (28.3%) | 59 (29.8%) | 37 (43.0%) | 39 (45.3%) | 51 (67.1%) | 53 (69.7%) | DES vs Con: <0.001 ‡ |
|
| <0.001 ‡ | ||||||
| <5 s | 95 (48.0%) | 92 (46.5%) | 28 (32.6%) | 28 (32.6%) | 0 | 1 (1.3%) | Cch vs DES: 0.001 † |
| 5–10 s | 82 (41.4%) | 84 (42.4%) | 33 (38.3%) | 35 (40.7%) | 29 (38.2%) | 29 (38.2%) | Cch vs Con: <0.001 ‡ |
| >10 s | 21 (10.6%) | 22 (11.1%) | 25 (29.1%) | 23 (26.7%) | 47 (61.8%) | 46 (60.5%) | DES vs Con: <0.001 ‡ |
|
| 0.010 | ||||||
| binocular positive | 3 (1.5%) | 1 (1.2%) | 0 | ||||
| monocular positive | 3 (1.5%) | 4 (4.7%) | 0 | ||||
| medium score | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| 14.9±2.9 | 14.6±3.5 | 16.6±3.2 | 16.5±2.7 | 16.2±4.5 | 14.9±5.7 | 0.648 |
Con: normal controls.
*: P<0.05, †: P<0.01, ‡: P<0.001.
The OSDI score, NEI VFQ-25 composite score, and the scores for each VFQ-25 subscale in enrolled subjects.
| Cch (n = 198) | DES & non-Cch (n = 86) | normal controls (n = 76) | P value | subgroup comparison | |
| OSDI | |||||
| average | 19.3±22.1 | 16.8±12.2 | 3.6±5.2 | <0.001‡ | Cch vs DES: 0.934, Cch vs Con: <0.001, DES vs Con: <0.001 |
| median | 12.5 | 15.9 | 0 | ||
| VFQ-25 | |||||
| General health | 56.3±14.6 | 56.2±15.2 | 62.5±15.7 | 0.012 | Cch vs DES: 0.998, Cch vs Con: 0.013, DES vs Con: 0.004 |
| General Vision | 65.9±13.1 | 68.2±13.7 | 69.8±12.7 | 0.096 | |
| Ocular Pain | 84.0±19.4 | 83.6±14.9 | 93.7±12.8 | 0.001† | Cch vs DES: 0.957, Cch vs Con: 0.001, DES vs Con: <0.001 |
| Near Activities | 81.6±17.4 | 89.1±16.1 | 87.9±14.1 | 0.001† | Cch vs DES: 0.003, Cch vs Con: 0.027, DES vs Con: 0.951 |
| Distance Activities | 91.1±14.6 | 94.4±12.3 | 96.3±8.9 | 0.116 | |
| Social Functioning | 93.1±13.5 | 95.9±11.9 | 97.7±8.2 | 0.202 | |
| Mental Health | 90.3±15.6 | 85.2±15.2 | 92.6±12.2 | 0.008† | Cch vs DES: 0.033, Cch vs Con: 0.878, DES vs Con: 0.011 |
| Role Difficulties | 88.2±21.1 | 91.6±15.5 | 93.7±16.0 | 0.096 | |
| Dependency | 93.6±15.7 | 94.4±12.6 | 96.3±13.9 | 0.462 | |
| Color Vision | 93.7±12.7 | 95.7±12.4 | 97.7±8.5 | 0.054 | |
| Peripheral Vision | 92.0±15.8 | 95.1±12.8 | 97.3±8.9 | 0.234 | |
| VFQ-25 composite score | 87.4±12.3 | 87.7±10.0 | 92.3±8.0 | 0.007† | Cch vs DES: 0.854, Cch vs Con: 0.004, DES vs Con: 0.011 |
OSDI: Ocular Surface Disease Index, NEI VFQ-25: 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire, DES: dry eye syndrome, Cch: conjunctivochalasis, Con: normal controls.
*: P<0.05, †: P<0.01, ‡: P<0.001.
The classification of participants with Cch.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| Grade (G) | 43 (21.7%) | 131 (66.2%) | 24 (12.1%) |
| G1-Subgrade | T: 33(76.6%) | M: 5 (11.6%) | N: 5 (11.6%) |
| G2-Subgrade | T+N: 115 (87.8%) M+N: 16 (12.2%) | ||
| Folds versus Tear Meniscus Height (H) | 86 (43.4%) | 70 (35.4%) | 42 (21.2%) |
| Punctal Occlusion (O) | 172 (86.9%) | 26 (13.1%) | |
| Changes in Down Gaze (DG) | 117 (59.1%) | 7 (3.5%) | 74 (37.4%) |
| Changes by Digital Pressure (P) | 125 (63.1%) | 36 (18.2%) | 37 (18.7%) |
T: Temporal, M:Middle, N: Nasal.