Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Low-Vision Rehabilitation Using Two Questionnaires and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health

Suksri  Chotikavanich; Akarawit Eiamsamarng; Thanaporn  Layangool; Wichuda  Krutthong; Siriwan  Loket; Rungtip  Yingyong; Somthin  Dongngam; Waree  Nujoi; Jaruwan  Jai-ai; Nattapon  Sarinak; Ekpipat  Eksupapan; Saranya  Sagan; Peeraya  Chaowalitwong

doi:10.33192/smj.v76i10.268929

Authors

Suksri Chotikavanich Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Akarawit Eiamsamarng Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Thanaporn Layangool Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Wichuda Krutthong Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Siriwan Loket Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Rungtip Yingyong Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Somthin Dongngam Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Waree Nujoi Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Jaruwan Jai-ai Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Nattapon Sarinak Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Ekpipat Eksupapan Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Saranya Sagan Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Peeraya Chaowalitwong Human Research Protection Unit, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33192/smj.v76i10.268929

Keywords:

International classification of functioning disability and health, low vision, quality of life, Thailand, vision rehabilitation

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a low-vision service by using three tools and to identify the specific outcomes obtained from each instrument.

Materials and Methods: Patients consecutively visiting the low-vision clinic at Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, were enrolled. The impact of the prescribed rehabilitation on patient quality of life was measured using three tools: the Low-Vision Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire (LVQOL); the generic EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire (EQ-5D); and the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF).

Results: Out of the 104 patients recruited, 76 patients (mean age, 53 ± 16.2 years) completed the questionnaires before and after rehabilitation, which was assessed after 5.8 ± 2.0 months. Post-rehabilitation, the time of follow-up, patients had significant improvements in the mean scores of both the LVQOL scores and mean EQ-5D scores compared to before rehabilitation (P < 0.001), with Cohen’s effect sizes of 0.85 and 0.67, respectively. Subgroup analyses by age, severity, and cause of visual impairment also showed significant improvements in the LVQOL (P < 0.05), but not the EQ-5D score in the blindness severity subgroup. The ICF scores also showed significant improvement in most domains, including seeing functions, mobility across different locations, transportation use, meal preparation, economic self-sufficiency, community life, and recreational activities (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Patients with low vision experienced significant improvements following vision rehabilitation, especially in terms of seeing functions and mobility. Evaluation by different questionnaire types could provide additional information. The WHO-ICF was effective in assessing each domain related to activity performance and participation.

References

Wolffsohn JS, Cochrane AL. Design of the low vision quality-of-life questionnaire (LVQOL) and measuring the outcome of low-vision rehabilitation. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:793-802. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00610-3

Bruijning JE, van Rens GH, Knol DL, van Nispen RMA. Evaluation of reading, writing, and watching TV using the Dutch ICF Activity Inventory. Optom Vis Sci. 2014;91(11):1360-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000391

Stelmack JA, Stelmack TR, Massof RW. Measuring low-vision rehabilitation outcomes with the NEI VFQ-25. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43(9):2859-68.

Gothwal VK, Bharani S. Outcomes of multidisciplinary low vision rehabilitation in adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(12):7451-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-16892

Malkin AG, Goldstein JE, Perlmutter MS, Massof RW, Low Vision Research Network Study Group. Responsiveness of the EQ-5D to the effects of low vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci. 2013;90(8):799-805. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000005

Burggraaf MC, van Nispen RMA, Knol DL, Ringens PJ, van Rens GHMB. Randomized controlled trial on the effects of CCTV training on quality of life, depression, and adaptation to vision loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(7):3645-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.11-9226

World Health Organization. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.

World Health Organization. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.

Thai Ministry of Public Health. The Thai version of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Thailand: Thai Ministry of Public Health; 2012.

Leissner J, Coenen M, Froehlich S, Loyola D, Cieza A. What explains health in persons with visual impairment? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-12-65

van Leeuwen LM, Rainey L, Kef S, van Rens GHMB, van Nispen RMA. Investigating rehabilitation needs of visually impaired young adults according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015;93(7):642-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.12782

Goljar N, Burger H, Vidmar G, Leonardi M, Marincek C. Measuring patterns of disability using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in the post-acute stroke rehabilitation setting. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(7):590-601. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0832

Sigmundsdottir L, Longley WA, Tate RL.Computerised cognitive training in acquired brain injury: a systematic review of outcomes using the International Classification of Functioning (ICF). Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2016;26(5-6):673-741. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2016.1140657

Bunketorp-Käll L, Reinholdt C, Fridén J, Wangdell J. Essential gains and health after upper-limb tetraplegia surgery identified by the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF). Spinal Cord. 2017;55(9):857-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2017.36

World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases, 10th revision 2003 version (second edition). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.

Chotikavanich S, Chanvarapha N, Loket S, Yingyong R, Dongngam S, Nujoi W, et al. A 5-year retrospective record review of hospital-based low-vision rehabilitation in Thailand. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2018;10:41-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S160103

Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37(1):53-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6

Tongsiri S, Cairns J. Estimating population-based values for EQ-5D health states in Thailand. Value Health. 2011;14(8):1142-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.005

Yingyong P. Evaluation of the Thai, Low Vision Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (LVQOL). J Med Assoc Thai. 2007;90(12):2658-61.

Larner AJ. Effect size (Cohen's d) of cognitive screening instruments examined in pragmatic diagnostic accuracy studies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra. 2014;4(2):236-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000363735

Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155

Stelmack J. Quality of life of low-vision patients and outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(5):335-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-200105000-00017

Macedo AF, Ramos PL, Hernandez-Moreno L, Cima J, Baptista AMG, Marques AP, et al. Visual and health outcomes, measured with the activity inventory and the EQ-5D, in visual impairment. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017;95(8):e783-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.13430

Wang BZ, Pesudovs K, Keane MC, Daly A, Chen CS. Evaluating the effectiveness of multidisciplinary low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(9):1399-408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182678d82

Stelmack JA, Babcock-Parziale JL, Head DN, Wolfe GS, Fakhoury NE, Wu SM, et al. Timing and directions for administration of questionnaires affect outcomes measurement. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006;43(6):809-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2005.06.0115

Stelmack JA, Moran D, Dean D, Massof RW. Short- and long-term effects of an intensive inpatient vision rehabilitation program. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(6):691-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.03.025

Gobeille M, Malkin A, Jamara R, Ross NC. Clinical outcomes of low vision rehabilitation delivered by a mobile clinic. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2018;38(2):193-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12440