DOI: https://doi.org/10.22263/2312-4156.2025.1.89
V.L. Krasilnikova1, O.N. Dudich1, S.M. Gridjushko2, A.M. Prudnik3, M.S. Ilyasova3
The scale elaboration to assess patient’s satisfaction with surgical outcomes and intraocular lens selection based on the target refraction
1The Institute for Advanced Training & Retraining of Healthcare Personnel of the educational institution “Belarusian State Medical University”, Minsk, Republic of Belarus
2Gomel Regional Specialized Clinical Hospital, Gomel, Republic of Belarus
3Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics, Minsk, Republic of Belarus
Vestnik VGMU. 2025;24(1):89-100.
Abstract.
The article presents the results of the questionnaire scale elaboration to assess patients’ satisfaction with cataract surgery outcomes, considering refractive targets. The analysis of the existing instruments including NEI-VFQ-25, VF-14, ADVS, and Catquest-9SF was conducted; the use of a modified version of the latter was justified. Using statistical methods (PCA, varimax rotation, and multifactor analysis), the scale structure was identified, comprising three main components: overall visual quality, emotional aspects, and patient preferences. The questionnaire scale presented in the article accounts for both functional and emotional aspects influencing the outcomes of the cataract surgery. The analysis of existing scales revealed that none of them comprehensively cover all key aspects, including patients’ preoperative preferences and psychological state. The findings emphasize the significance of the proposed scale in improving treatment planning, monitoring, and accommodating individual patient preferences.
Keywords: cataract, PRO scale, visual function, surgical treatment, refractive targets, validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity.
References
1. Kohnen T. Questionnaires for cataract and refractive surgery. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. 2019 Feb;45(2):119-120. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.12.020
2. Alvarez-Peregrina C, Sánchez-Tena MA, Caballé-Fontanet D, Thuissard-Vasallo IJ, Gacimartín-García MB, Orduna-Magán C. Crosscultural adaptation and validation into Spanish of the questionnaire National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire 25. Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología. 2018 Dec;93(12):586-591. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oftal.2018.05.017
3. Khadka J, Huang J, Mollazadegan K, Gao R, Chen H, Zhang S, Wang Q, Pesudovs K. Translation, cultural adaptation, and Rasch analysis of the visual function (VF-14) questionnaire. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2014 Jun;55(7):4413-4420. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.14-14017
4. Mollazadegan K, Huang J, Khadka J, Wang Q, Yang F, Gao R, Pesudovs K. Cross-cultural validation of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. 2014 May;40(5):774-784. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.10.040
5. Revicki DA. Regulatory Issues and Patient-Reported Outcomes Task Force for the International Society for Quality of Life Research. FDA draft guidance and health-outcomes research. Lancet. 2007 Feb;369(9561):540-542. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60250-5
6. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Keeves JP, Elliott DB. The Activities of Daily Vision Scale for cataract surgery outcomes: re-evaluating validity with Rasch analysis. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2003 Jul;44(7):2892-2899. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.02-1075
7. Lundström Mats, Pesudovs K. Catquest-9SF patient outcomes questionnaire: nine-item short-form Rasch-scaled revision of the Catquest questionnaire. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. 2009 Mar;35(3):504-513. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.11.038
8. McAlinden C, Gothwal VK, Khadka J, Wright TA, Lamoureux EL, Pesudovs K. A head-to-head comparison of 16 cataract surgery outcome questionnaires. Ophthalmology. 2011 Dec;118(12):2374-2381. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.06.008
9. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, Javitt JC, Sharkey P, Cassard SD, et al. The VF-14: an index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Archives of Ophthalmology. 1994 May;112(5):630-638. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1994.01090170074026
10. Khadka J, McAlinden C, Pesudovs K. Quality assessment of ophthalmic questionnaires: review and recommendations. Optometry and Vision Science. 2013 Aug;90(8):720-744. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000001
11. Mylona I, Aletras V, Ziakas N, Tsinopoulos I. Rasch Validation of the VF-14 Scale of Vision-Specific Functioning in Greek Patients. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021 Apr;18(8):4254. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18084254
12. Petrillo J, Bressler NM, Lamoureux E, Ferreira A, Cano S. Development of a new Rasch-based scoring algorithm for the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire to improve its interpretability. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2017 Aug;15(1):157. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0726-5
13. Wan Y, Zhao L, Huang C, Xu Y, Sun M, Yang Y, et al. Validation and comparison of the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) and the Visual Function Index-14 (VF-14) in patients with cataracts: a multicentre study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2021 Jun;99(4):e480-e488. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14606
14. Lešin Gaćina D, Škegro B, Jandroković S, Škegro I, Bešlić I, Bukvić M. Psychometric properties of the Croatian version of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). International Ophthalmology. 2021;41(11):4025-4036. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01975-y
15. Sivaprasad S, Tschosik E, Kapre A, Varma R, Bressler NM, Kimel M, et al. Reliability and construct validity of the NEI VFQ-25 in a subset of patients with geographic atrophy from the Phase 2 Mahalo Study. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2018 Jun;190:1-8. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2018.03.006
16. Noordzij M, Tripepi G, Dekker FW, Zoccali C, Tanck MW, Jager KJ. Sample size calculations: basic principles and common pitfalls. Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation. 2010 May;25(5):1388-13893. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfp732
Submitted 06.12.2024
Accepted 11.02.2025
Information about authors:
V.L. Krasilnikova – Doctor of Medical Sciences, professor of the Chair of Ophthalmology, the Institute for Advanced Training and Retraining of Healthcare Personnel of the Educational Institution “Belarusian State Medical University”, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5852-2616
O.N. Dudich – Candidate of Medical Sciences, associate professor of the Chair of Ophthalmology, the Institute for Advanced Training and Retraining of Healthcare Personnel of the Educational Institution “Belarusian State Medical University”, https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6554-3230
S.M. Gridjushko – ophthalmologist, Eye Microsurgery Department No. 2, Gomel Regional Specialized Clinical Hospital, https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9013-6616
e-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищён от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра. – Sergey M. Gridjushko;
A.M. Prudnik – Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Chair of Engineering Psychology and Ergonomics, Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6180-1819
M.S. Ilyasova – Assistant of the Chair of Engineering Psychology and Ergonomics, Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics, https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5768-635X
