Schulz Christopher B, Malhotra Raman
Corneoplastic Unit, 156485Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead, RH19 3DZ, UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Department of Ophthalmology, 6698Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Cosham, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK.
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2022 Jul;32(4):2108-2115. doi: 10.1177/11206721221104550. Epub 2022 May 29.
To test the reliability, validity and utility of the TEARS score, a scale of clinical and patient-reported severity in patients with epiphora, comprising 4 subscales: Times wiping (T), clinical Effects (E), Activity limitation (A), and symptoms of Reflex epiphora (R).
The TEARS score was completed by 136 patients with epiphora (78 treated surgically, and 51 non-surgically). Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using Cohen's Kappa and Bland-Altman analysis. 129 (95%) participants were followed up 2-6 months after baseline (non-surgical patients) or 3-6 months post-operatively (surgical patients). For each TEARS subscale, differences in scores were compared. Convergent validity was evaluated by testing correlation between TEARS and both The Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire (Lac-Q) and The Watery Eye Quality of Life Score (WEQOL).
Inter-rater reliability (Cohen's K) ranged from 0.5 for 'A' and 'R' to 0.8 for 'T' and 'E' subscales. Scores were lower post-operatively in surgical patients (p < 0.001). 'R' scores (reflex tearing) were higher in non-surgical cases compared with surgical (p = 0.02) but no difference was observed in other subscales at baseline. TEARS subscale scores were positively correlated with both WEQOL (r = 0.51 to 0.73) and Lac-Q score (r = 0.55 to 0.63).
The TEARS score is quickly and easily implemented in a busy clinical setting. It provides an overview of both subjective and objective clinical severity in patients with epiphora, with appropriate reliability, post-operative responsiveness and convergent validity for this purpose and in this setting. It is a valuable template to be used alongside individualised symptomology.
测试泪溢评分(TEARS评分)的可靠性、有效性和实用性,这是一种用于评估泪溢患者临床及患者报告严重程度的量表,包括4个分量表:擦拭次数(T)、临床影响(E)、活动受限(A)和反射性泪溢症状(R)。
136例泪溢患者完成了TEARS评分(78例行手术治疗,51例未行手术治疗)。采用Cohen's Kappa系数和Bland-Altman分析评估评分者间信度。129例(95%)参与者在基线后2 - 6个月(非手术患者)或术后3 - 6个月(手术患者)接受随访。比较每个TEARS分量表的评分差异。通过测试TEARS与泪溢症状问卷(Lac-Q)和泪溢生活质量评分(WEQOL)之间的相关性来评估收敛效度。
评分者间信度(Cohen's K)在“A”和“R”分量表为0.5,在“T”和“E”分量表为0.8。手术患者术后评分较低(p < 0.001)。非手术病例的“R”评分(反射性流泪)高于手术病例(p = 0.02),但在基线时其他分量表未观察到差异。TEARS分量表评分与WEQOL(r = 0.51至0.73)和Lac-Q评分(r = 0.55至0.63)均呈正相关。
TEARS评分在繁忙的临床环境中可快速、简便地实施。它能概述泪溢患者主观和客观的临床严重程度,在此目的和环境下具有适当的可靠性、术后反应性和收敛效度。它是一个有价值的模板,可与个体化症状一起使用。