Xue Wenwen, Xu Xian, Zou Haidong
Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 100 Haining Road, Hongkou District, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Fundus Disease, Shanghai Engineering Center for Visual Science and Photomedicine, Shanghai, China.
Int Ophthalmol. 2019 Mar;39(3):563-569. doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-0847-9. Epub 2018 Feb 7.
To determine which utility value assessment method is more suitable to evaluate changes in the quality of life due to dry eye symptoms.
Dry eye outpatients with a presenting visual acuity of 20/25 or better in the worse-seeing eye were recruited. Presenting distance visual acuity, tear film break-up time, Schirmer I test and fluorescein were assessed. The severity of dry eye symptoms was assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), and utility values were measured using the time trade-off (TTO), standard gamble (SG1 and SG2) and rating scale (RS) methods. Different utility values were compared with each other. The most appropriate utility value method to evaluate quality-of-life changes solely due to dry eye symptoms is determined by calculating the correlation between the OSDI score and different utility values.
A total of 104 patients were enrolled. The three sections of OSDI in the order of high to low scores were as follows: "environmental trigger," "eye discomfort" and "visual function." The utility scores measured with TTO, SG1, SG2 and RS were 0.95 ± 0.11, 0.96 ± 0.10, 0.99 ± 0.07 and 0.89 ± 0.10, respectively. The utility scores evaluated by the TTO, SG1, SG2 and RS methods were significantly different from each other (p < 0.05). Only the utility scores measured with RS were significantly correlated with the composite OSDI score, "environmental trigger" and "eye discomfort" section scores (p < 0.05).
RS is more sensitive than TTO and SG for the evaluation of altered quality of life due to dry eye symptoms.
确定哪种效用值评估方法更适合评估因干眼症状导致的生活质量变化。
招募最佳矫正视力为20/25或更好的干眼门诊患者。评估最佳矫正远视力、泪膜破裂时间、Schirmer I试验和荧光素。使用眼表疾病指数（OSDI）评估干眼症状的严重程度，并使用时间权衡法（TTO）、标准博弈法（SG1和SG2）和评分量表法（RS）测量效用值。对不同的效用值进行相互比较。通过计算OSDI评分与不同效用值之间的相关性，确定最适合仅评估因干眼症状导致的生活质量变化的效用值方法。
共纳入104例患者。OSDI的三个部分得分从高到低依次为：“环境诱因”“眼部不适”和“视觉功能”。用TTO、SG1、SG2和RS测量的效用得分分别为0.95±0.11、0.96±0.10、0.99±0.07和0.89±0.10。用TTO、SG1、SG2和RS方法评估的效用得分彼此之间有显著差异（p<0.05）。仅用RS测量的效用得分与综合OSDI评分、“环境诱因”和“眼部不适”部分得分显著相关（p<0.05）。
在评估因干眼症状导致的生活质量改变方面，RS比TTO和SG更敏感。
