Patient-reported outcome measuring tools in cataract surgery: Clinical comparison at a tertiary hospital

PURPOSE: To assess the performance of patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires and determine their appropriateness for routine use in cataract patients. SETTING: Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients having cataract surgery between February and March 2013 were recruited. The following 4 questionnaires—Catquest-9SF, EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) and visual analog scale (EQ-VAS), National Eye Institute Socioemotional Scale (NEI-SES), and short-form Visual Function Index (VF-8R)—were completed preoperatively and 3 weeks and 3 months postoperatively. The questionnaires’ performances were then compared. The paired Student t test and Pearson correlations were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-two patients were recruited; 67.2% and 61.8% completed 3-week and 3-month follow-up, respectively. The changes in the mean scores for the Catquest-9SF, EQ-5D, EQ-VAS, NEI-SES, and VF-8R at 3 weeks were 120.86% (P < .0001), 1.61% (P = .61), 3.37% (P = .09), 16.12% (P = .12), and 61.76 % (P < .0001), respectively. At 3 months, the changes were 162.42% (P < .0001), 4.54% (P = .16), 4.84% (P = .09), 54.63% (P < .0001), and 87.55% (P < .0001), respectively. Correlations between patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires and visual acuity measures were variable and weak at best. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to assess patient-reported outcomes in cataract surgery as part of routine clinical practice. In addition, visual acuity might not fully reflect patients’ visual function. Clinicians should consider using patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires to facilitate surgical decision-making and outcome monitoring. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned