The British journal of ophthalmology · 2006
Validity of using vision-related quality of life as a treatment end point in intermediate and posterior uveitis.
Клиническое исследование I фазыКлиническое исследование II фазыСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Murphy Conor C, Greiner Kathrin, Plskova Jarka, Frost N Andrew, Forrester John V, Dick Andrew D
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the responsiveness of the Vision core module 1 (VCM1) vision-related quality of life (VR-QOL) questionnaire to changes in visual acuity in patients with posterior and intermediate uveitis and to validate its use as a clinical end point in uveitis.
METHODS: Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity and VR-QOL using the VCM1 questionnaire were prospectively recorded in 37 patients with active posterior segment intraocular inflammation before starting systemic immunosuppression with ciclosporin, tacrolimus or the anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agent, p55TNFr-Ig, and again 3 months later. Spearman analysis was used to correlate improvements in visual acuity and VR-QOL between baseline and 3 months.
RESULTS: The correlation between changes in visual acuity and VR-QOL was moderate to good for the worse eye (r = 0.47, p = 0.003), but poor for the better eye (r = -0.05, p = 0.91). The responsiveness indices effect size and standardised response mean were 0.57 and 0.59, respectively, showing that the VCM1 questionnaire is moderately responsive to immunsosuppressive therapy for active uveitis.
CONCLUSION: Changes in VR-QOL measured with the VCM1 questionnaire correlated moderately well with changes in the worse eye visual acuity, suggesting that the VCM1 is a valid instrument for monitoring response to treatment in uveitis.
METHODS: Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity and VR-QOL using the VCM1 questionnaire were prospectively recorded in 37 patients with active posterior segment intraocular inflammation before starting systemic immunosuppression with ciclosporin, tacrolimus or the anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agent, p55TNFr-Ig, and again 3 months later. Spearman analysis was used to correlate improvements in visual acuity and VR-QOL between baseline and 3 months.
RESULTS: The correlation between changes in visual acuity and VR-QOL was moderate to good for the worse eye (r = 0.47, p = 0.003), but poor for the better eye (r = -0.05, p = 0.91). The responsiveness indices effect size and standardised response mean were 0.57 and 0.59, respectively, showing that the VCM1 questionnaire is moderately responsive to immunsosuppressive therapy for active uveitis.
CONCLUSION: Changes in VR-QOL measured with the VCM1 questionnaire correlated moderately well with changes in the worse eye visual acuity, suggesting that the VCM1 is a valid instrument for monitoring response to treatment in uveitis.