: This study compared the general health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and the vision-specific HRQOL in patients following the surgical removal of 1 eye who had good vision in the remaining eye to a group of binocular patients with good vision in OU.
: The Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 12 and the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire HRQOL surveys were administered to 29 patients who had surgical removal of an eye who attended an ocular prosthetics clinic and to 25 binocular persons who accompanied a patient. All subjects in each group had best-corrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better. Overall statistical significance was tested using Cramer's V followed by individual t tests for independent groups for each of the scales on the 2 questionnaires to determine whether the means between the 2 groups differed statistically.
: The patient group had a mean age of 50.98 years (range, 19-76 years). The control group had a mean age of 49.46 years (range, 18-76 years). The mean time after loss of vision was 28.03 years (range, 1-71 years), and the mean time from surgical removal of the eye was 23.6 years (range, 0.5-59.5 years). There was an overall significant difference between the 2 groups on the 15 derived subscales of the 2 forms (Cramer's V, p = 0.0025). Three general HRQOL subscales (Short Form 12-mental component summary, Short Form 12 physical component summary, and National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-General Health) showed no differences between the 2 groups (p = 0.48, p = 0.81, and p = 0.78, respectively). Three of the 12 vision-specific National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire subscales demonstrated statistically significant differences between the patient and control groups: peripheral vision (p = 0.0006), role difficulties (p = 0.015), and the composite score (p = 0.014). In addition, 2 monocular patients had given up driving compared with no binocular subjects (p = 0.056).
: This population of monocular patients had general physical and mental HRQOL equivalent to the normal binocular group despite the surgical removal of 1 eye. However, the reduced vision-specific HRQOL of monocular patients on the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire indicates that there are substantial residual visual deficits even after prolonged monocular status.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Binocular diplopia is a debilitating visual symptom requiring immediate intervention for symptomatic control, whether or not definitive treatment is eventually possible. Where prismatic correction is infeasible, the current standard is occlusion, either by a patch or an opaque contact lens. In eliminating one problem-diplopia-occlusive techniques invariably create another: reduced peripheral vision. Crucially, this is often unnecessary, for the reduced spatial resolution in the periphery limits its contribution to the perception of diplopia. Here, we therefore introduce a novel soft contact lens device that instead creates a monocular central scotoma inversely mirroring the physiological variation in spatial acuity across the monocular visual field, thereby suppressing the diplopia with minimal impact on the periphery. We compared the device against standard eye patching in 12 normal subjects with prism-induced binocular diplopia and 12 patients with binocular diplopia of diverse causes. Indexed by self-reported scores and binocular perimetry, the scotogenic contact lens was comparably effective in eliminating the diplopia while significantly superior in acceptability and its impact on the peripheral visual field. This simple, inexpensive, non-invasive device may thus be an effective new tool in the treatment of a familiar but still troublesome clinical problem.
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Full-text · Article · Feb 2015 · British Journal of Ophthalmology
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Aims:
To investigate the association of demographic, clinical and psychosocial variables with levels of anxiety and depression in participants wearing an ocular prosthesis after eye enucleation.
This cross-sectional study included 195 participants with an enucleated eye who were attending an ophthalmic clinic for prosthetic rehabilitation between July and November 2014. Demographic and clinical data, and self-reported feelings of shame, sadness and anger were collected. Participants also completed the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire, the Facial Appearance subscale of the Negative Physical Self Scale, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Regression models were used to identify the factors associated with anxiety and depression.
The proportion of participants with clinical anxiety was 11.8% and clinical depression 13.8%. More anxiety and depression were associated with poorer vision-related quality of life and greater levels of appearance concerns. Younger age was related to greater levels of anxiety. Less educated participants and those feeling more angry about losing an eye are more prone to experience depression. Clinical variables were unrelated to anxiety or depression.
Anxiety and depression are more prevalent in eye-enucleated patients than the general population, which brings up the issues of psychiatric support in these patients. Psychosocial rather than clinical characteristics were associated with anxiety and depression. Longitudinal studies need to be conducted to further elucidate the direction of causality before interventions to improve mood states are developed.