Is adjustment of National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire scores for general health necessary in randomized trials?

Am J Ophthalmol. 2004 May;137(5):961-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2003.11.018.

Abstract

Purpose: To assess whether treatment comparison of National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) scores in a clinical trial is influenced by general health to warrant adjusting for it.

Design: Two randomized pilot trials.

Methods: Patients enrolled in two randomized pilot trials of submacular surgery versus observation for choroidal neovascularization had quality of life interviews (NEI-VFQ and the Short Form-36 Health Survey) 24 months after enrollment. Information on comorbidities was collected through chart reviews. Data from 120 patients were analyzed using linear regression methods.

Results: Adjustment for comorbidities did not change the magnitude of the treatment effect on NEI-VFQ scores. However, adjustment for Short Form-36 physical and mental component summaries produced changes in the estimated treatment effect when NEI-VFQ scores were compared.

Conclusions: Adjustment of NEI-VFQ scores for general health may be advisable. The Short Form-36 summary scores may be appropriate for this purpose.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Choroidal Neovascularization / etiology
  • Choroidal Neovascularization / physiopathology
  • Choroidal Neovascularization / surgery*
  • Comorbidity
  • Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic
  • Female
  • Health Status Indicators*
  • Humans
  • Macular Degeneration / complications
  • Macular Degeneration / physiopathology
  • Macular Degeneration / surgery*
  • Male
  • National Institutes of Health (U.S.) / standards*
  • Ophthalmology / standards
  • Pilot Projects
  • Quality of Life
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Surveys and Questionnaires / standards*
  • United States
  • Visual Acuity / physiology*