Relevance of quality of life and treatment compliance measurement in patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma

National audienceChronic glaucoma is a severe disease that can induce blindness.Early diagnosis and symptomatic treatment reduce the risk of blindness. Treatment that will be started before the onset of clinical signs and will remain lifelong thereafter is troublesome, and therapeutic compliance is usually poor. Thus, quality of life (QOL) measurement in patients with chronic glaucoma has a particular purpose: to measure patients' perception of the disease and treatment in order to maintain good treatment compliance to ensure therapeutic management efficacy and to preserve visual function. No glaucoma-specific instrument is available in the medical and QOL literature. Various generic(SF-36, SF-20 and SIP) and specific(VAQ, VF-14, NEI-VFQ) QOL questionnaires,one glaucoma-specific symptomatic scale (GSS),and one treatment preference scale (COMTol) have been used to measure QOL in glaucoma patients. These instruments do not sufficiently measure the psychosocial dimension of the disease and the QOL impact of treatment. An instrument able to measure all dimensions needs to be developed in order to help ophthalmologists in the therapeutic management of their patients and to measure QOLin patients in the successive stages of the disease

An introduction to patient-reported outcome measures in ophthalmic research

Clinical outcomes, such as quantifying the extent of visual field loss by automated perimetry, are valued highly by health professionals, but such measures do not capture the impact of the condition on a patient's life. Patient-reported outcomes describe any report or measure of health reported by the patient, without external interpretation by a clinician or researcher. In this review, we discuss the value of the measures that capture this information (patient-reported outcome measures; PROMs), and why they are important to both the clinician and the researcher. We also consider issues around developing or selecting a PROM for ophthalmic research, the emerging challenges around conducting and reporting PROMs in clinical trials and highlight best practice for their use. Search terms for this review comprised: (1) (patient-reported outcomes OR patient-reported outcome measures) AND (2) randomised controlled trials AND (3) limited to ophthalmic conditions. These terms were expanded as follows: (((‘patients'(MeSH Terms) OR ‘patients'(All Fields) OR ‘patient'(All Fields)) AND (‘research report'(MeSH Terms) OR (‘research'(All Fields) AND ‘report'(All Fields)) OR ‘research report'(All Fields) OR ‘reported'(All Fields)) AND outcomes(All Fields)) OR ((‘patients'(MeSH Terms) OR ‘patients'(All Fields) OR ‘patient'(All Fields)) AND (‘research report'(MeSH Terms) OR (‘research'(All Fields) AND ‘report'(All Fields)) OR ‘research report'(All Fields) OR ‘reported'(All Fields) AND (‘outcome assessment (health care)'(MeSH Terms) OR (‘outcome'(All Fields) AND ‘assessment'(All Fields) AND ‘(health'(All Fields) AND ‘care)'(All Fields)) OR ‘outcome assessment (health care)'(All Fields) OR (‘outcome'(All Fields) AND ‘measures'(All Fields)) OR ‘outcome measures'(All Fields)))) AND (‘randomized controlled trial'(Publication Type) OR ‘randomized controlled trials as topic'(MeSH Terms) OR ‘randomised controlled trials'(All Fields) OR ‘randomized controlled trials'(All Fields)) AND (ophth*(All Fields)). The authors also utilised the extensive non-ophthalmic literature and online resources relating to PROs and PROMs to inform this review