Utility Value and Retinal Detachment Surgery
Haidong Zou,Xi Zhang,Xun Xu,Haiyun Liu,Lin Bai,Xian Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.10.046
IF: 14.277
2011-01-01
Ophthalmology
Abstract:Studies on vision and health-related quality of life (VRQoL) in subjects with ophthalmic disease are becoming more frequently, but few have addressed VRQoL in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). Moreover, in studies reported to date, VRQoL is typically estimated for RRD patients by using an item-based questionnaire; however, these are limited in their ability to include every aspect of the important and variable quality-of-life parameters that may impact the patient.1Stein J.D. Disparities between ophthalmologists and their patients in estimating quality of life.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 238-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (51) Google Scholar As a further complication, it is difficult for investigators to compare VRQoL between different ophthalmic conditions, or to conduct analyses of health economics with data generated from questionnaires.1Stein J.D. Disparities between ophthalmologists and their patients in estimating quality of life.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 238-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (51) Google Scholar More concise VRQoL research is needed so that treatments and procedures may be improved. In an attempt to address these shortcomings we described, in a previously published report,2Zou H. Zhang X. Xu X. et al.Quality of life in subjects with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2008; 15: 212-217Crossref PubMed Scopus (13) Google Scholar our findings on moderate VRQoL impairment in 163 RRD patients by using both a questionnaire and a utility analysis, the latter believed to be one of the most all-encompassing instruments of quality-of-life assessments.3Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. Value-based medicine and vitreoretinal diseases.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 167-172Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar In a continuation of this study, 117 patients were selected for a current study with follow-up of 1-year postoperatively. These patients did not differ statistically from the 163 eligible patients in their preoperative characteristics and primary RRD surgical procedures (Table 1, available at http://aaojoural.org). RRD surgeries were performed in 131 eyes, including 14 bilateral operations. The retinas reattached in 107 eyes after the primary surgery procedure, in 122 eyes within 2 procedures, and in 128 eyes within 3 procedures. No severe intraoperative or postoperative complications, such as subretinal hemorrhage and glaucoma, occurred in any of these eyes. A skilled interviewer (HZ), who did not participate in clinical observations, administered the preoperative and 1-year postoperative utility value (UV) calculation using the well-accepted time trade-off utility analysis method2Zou H. Zhang X. Xu X. et al.Quality of life in subjects with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2008; 15: 212-217Crossref PubMed Scopus (13) Google Scholar, 4Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. et al.Quality of life associated with visual loss, a time tradeoff utility analysis comparison with medical health states.Ophthalmology. 2003; 110: 1076-1081Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar and ensured the consistency of the methodology. The adjusted life-years were assessed by the patients themselves and 3 ophthalmologists who were in charge of pre- and postoperative observations in double-blind fashion. These ophthalmologists, with more than 10 years of experience in vitreoretinal surgeries each, were asked to assume that they had the same VRQoL impairment as the patient during assessment. This study was conducted according to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board. All participants gave written informed consents. SPSS V10.0 Statistical package (Chicago, IL) was used for database setup and statistic analysis. We found that the UV in the RRD eye increased significantly after surgery. We also found the same for best corrected visual acuity (BCVA; Table 2, available at http://aaojoural.org). A significant difference was revealed between preoperative patient-assessed (range, 0.59 to 0.95; average, 0.77) and ophthalmologist-assessed UV (range, 0.62 to 0.99; average 0.90) with paired t-sample test (t=19.71, P<0.01). As considered intuitively, the ophthalmologists who trades away less time than actual patients do (indicated by higher UV) may underestimate the impact RRD has on VRQoL.1Stein J.D. Disparities between ophthalmologists and their patients in estimating quality of life.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 238-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (51) Google Scholar At the 1-year postoperative time point, a similar underestimation was found when comparing patient-assessed (range, 0.50 to 0.97; average 0.83) and ophthalmologist-assessed UV (range, 0.70 to 0.9; average 0.93, t=16.18, P<0.01). Regardless of assessors or assessment time, UV was always in parallel with BCVA in the better-seeing eye (Table 3, available at http://aaojoural.org). This variable was later affirmed as a related factor of UV by stepwise multiple regression analysis (P<0.05). No statistically significant relationship was found between UV and other patient characteristics listed in Table 1, BCVA in the poorer-seeing eye, and surgery complications (all P>0.05). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on specific UV of general RRD patients and UV change after RRD surgery. The statistically significant UV increase reflects an evident VRQoL improvement. We have confirmed the relationship between UV and BCVA in the better-seeing eye in the RRD patients. Our investigations found that this relationship can be confirmed by studies on other ophthalmic diseases.3Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. Value-based medicine and vitreoretinal diseases.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 167-172Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar, 4Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. et al.Quality of life associated with visual loss, a time tradeoff utility analysis comparison with medical health states.Ophthalmology. 2003; 110: 1076-1081Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar The absence of a relationship between other characteristics with UV reveals that the utility analysis is innate to human nature3Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. Value-based medicine and vitreoretinal diseases.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 167-172Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar, 4Brown M.M. Brown G.C. Sharma S. et al.Quality of life associated with visual loss, a time tradeoff utility analysis comparison with medical health states.Ophthalmology. 2003; 110: 1076-1081Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar and facilitates future cost-utility analysis and VRQoL comparison studies on RRD. Our study is also the first to investigate patient and ophthalmlogist perceptions of the impact of RRD and associated surgery on VRQoL. We found that the ophthalmologists always underestimated these patients' perceptions of VRQoL impairment. We believe the underestimation may be caused by several factors: the ophthalmologists' preoperative confidence that RRD surgery will soon help visual function recovery;1Stein J.D. Disparities between ophthalmologists and their patients in estimating quality of life.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15: 238-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (51) Google Scholar postoperative habitual reliance on BCVA index when judging functional outcomes; and the patients' pessimistic self-evaluation of visual function. More multidimensional communication between ophthalmologists and RRD patients is therefore advised to better incorporate the preferences of RRD patients for optimal treatment decisions. Table 1Preoperative patient characteristics and primary surgical operation manner in the first-diagnosed eye of RRD patients⁎RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; TTO: the time trade-off method; BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; “Vitrectomy” in the “Primary RRD surgical operation” column includes vitrectomy combined with scleral buckling surgical operation.RRD patients finally participatedTotal RRD eligible patientsStatistic value⁎⁎χ2: Mantel-Haenszel Chi-Square; t: Independent samples t-test value.P valueNo. of patients117163Mean age (SD) yrs54.28 (10.30)55.44 (14.48)t = 0.600.55Male [No. (%)]69 (58.97)82 (50.31)X2 = 2.050.15Education time > 10 yrs [No. (%)]78 (66.67)106 (65.03)X2 = 0.080.78Systemic comorbidities suffered [No. (%)]38 (32.48)65 (39.88)X2 = 1.600.21Mean duration of symptoms (SD) weeks5.34 (4.80)5.10 (4.89)t = 0.290.77Mean patient-assessed utility value (TTO) (SD)0.77 (0.12)0.71 (0.14)t = 1.650.08Characteristics of first-diagnosed RRD eye logMAR BCVA (SD)1.06 (0.63)0.96 (0.71)t = 1.310.19 Proliferative vitreoretinopathy grade A, B [No. (%)]105 (89.74)143 (87.73)X2 = 0.270.60 C, D [No. (%)]12 (10.26)20 (12.27) More than 2 quadrants detached [No. (%)]52 (44.44)72 (44.17)X2 < 0.010.96 Macula detached [No. (%)]72 (61.54)101 (61.96)X2 = 0.010.94 Primary RRD surgical operation manner Scleral buckling [No. (%)]68 (58.12)92 (56.44)X2 = 0.080.78 Vitrectomy [No. (%)]49 (41.89)71 (43.56) RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; TTO: the time trade-off method; BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; “Vitrectomy” in the “Primary RRD surgical operation” column includes vitrectomy combined with scleral buckling surgical operation. χ2: Mantel-Haenszel Chi-Square; t: Independent samples t-test value. Open table in a new tab Table 2Preoperative and postoperative logMAR BCVA and utility value (TTO) of 117 RRD patients⁎RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; TTO: the time trade-off; method; BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; NA: not assessed.Preoperative Mean (SD)Postoperative3-month after1-year afterMean (SD)Mean (SD)t⁎⁎statistic values calculated between preoperative and 1-year postoperative time point, t: paired t-sample test.p⁎⁎statistic values calculated between preoperative and 1-year postoperative time point, t: paired t-sample test.logMAR BCVA in the first-diagnosed RRD eye1.06 (0.63)0.68 (0.40)0.51 (0.32)11.83<0.01RRD patient-assessed utility value0.77 (0.12)NA0.83 (0.10)7.52<0.01Ophthalmologist-assessed utility value0.90 (0.07)NA0.93 (0.06)7.23<0.01 RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; TTO: the time trade-off; method; BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; NA: not assessed. statistic values calculated between preoperative and 1-year postoperative time point, t: paired t-sample test. Open table in a new tab Table 3utility value (TTO) in subgroups stratified by Snellen BCVA in better-seeing eye at the same study time⁎BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; TTO: the time trade-off method; RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. in 117 RRD participants20/20–20/25 Mean (SD)20/30–20/50 Mean (SD)20/60–20/100 Mean (SD)20/200–20/400 Mean (SD)Worse than 20/400 Mean (SD)Preoperative patient number62263944 RRD patient-assessed utility value0.84 (0.06)0.79 (0.06)0.70 (0.10)0.61 (0.02)0.48 (0.08) Ophthalmologist-assessed utility value0.94 (0.04)0.92 (0.04)0.85 (0.08)0.83 (0.04)0.67 (0.04)1-year postoperative study time patient number26115048 RRD patient-assessed utility value0.90 (0.03)0.81 (0.06)0.75 (0.04)0.68 (0.09)0.59 (0.06) Ophthalmologist-assessed utility value0.97 (0.02)0.93 (0.02)0.90 (0.03)0.80 (0.03)0.72 (0.02) BCVA: best corrected visual acuity; TTO: the time trade-off method; RRD: rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Open table in a new tab Quality of life associated with visual loss: A time tradeoff utility analysis comparison with medical health statesOphthalmologyVol. 110Issue 6PreviewTo assess the visual utility values of patients with ocular disease and to compare these values with those of patients with systemic health states Full-Text PDF