Cross-cultural validation of the functional vision questionnaire for children and young people (FVQ_CYP) with visual impairment in the Dutch population: challenges and opportunities

BACKGROUND:To assess cross-cultural validity between Dutch and English versions of the FVQ_CYP, a patient-reported outcome measure developed in the United Kingdom (UK) for children and adolescents with (severe) visual impairment or blindness (VI for brevity) to measure functional vision. METHODS:The 36-item FVQ_CYP was translated and adapted into Dutch using standard guidelines. The questionnaire was administered to Dutch children and adolescents aged 7-17 years (N = 253) with impaired vision (no restrictions regarding acuity). Data were compared to existing UK data of children and adolescents aged 10-15 years (N = 91) with VI (acuity LogMar worse than 0.48). As with the original UK FVQ_CYP validation, a rating scale model (RSM) was applied to the Dutch data. RESULTS:Minor adaptations were needed in translation-rounds. Significant differences in item responses were found between the Dutch and UK data. Item response theory assumptions were met, but fit to the RSM was unsatisfactory. Therefore, psychometric properties of the Dutch FVQ_CYP were analysed irrespective of the original model and criteria used. A graded response model led to the removal of 12 items due to missing data, low information, overlapping content and limited relevance to Dutch children. Fit indices for the remaining 24 items were adequate. CONCLUSIONS:Differences in population characteristics, distribution of responses, non-invariance at the model level and small sample sizes challenged the cross-cultural validation process. However, the Dutch adapted FVQ_CYP showed high measurement precision and broad coverage of items measuring children's functional vision. The underlying reasons for differences between countries in instrument performance are discussed with implications for future studies

The association between visual impairment and fatigue: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies

Purpose: The aim was to compare fatigue levels between patients with visual impairment and controls with normal sight and to examine the association between fatigue and vision loss severity. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using databases of PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane to identify observational studies with outcomes related to fatigue (e.g. vitality subscale of the Short-Form 36, Fatigue Assessment Scale). A meta-analysis was performed using standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (OR) to quantitatively summarise the association between visual impairment and fatigue. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: After reviewing 4477 studies, 22 studies with a total of 40 004 participants were included, of which 18 contributed to meta-analysis. Among these, eight were assessed as moderate quality studies and 10 as high quality studies. Pooled analysis involving 2500 patients and 8395 controls showed higher fatigue severity levels (S.M.D. = −0.36, 95% CI −0.50 to −0.22, 14 studies) among visually impaired patients compared to normally sighted controls. This effect size was small and persisted in sensitivity analyses that involved study quality, fatigue assessment tools and visual acuity data. Furthermore, pooled analysis of four studies including 2615 patients and 5438 controls showed a significant association between visual impairment and fatigue (OR = 2.61, 95% CI 1.69 to 4.04). Secondary meta-analysis of four studies showed no significant difference in fatigue severity (S.M.D. = 0.01, 95% CI −0.37 to 0.39) between patients with moderate visual impairment and patients with severe visual impairment or blindness. Conclusions: Current moderate to high quality evidence suggest that patients with visual impairment experience more severe fatigue symptoms than persons with normal sight. However, a limited number of available studies indicates that fatigue is not associated with severity of vision loss. Future studies are required to determine which factors and underlying mechanisms may explain the association between visual impairment and fatigue. Discussing fatigue at an early stage and developing intervention options for vision-related fatigue should be considered within the field of low vision rehabilitation