Evaluation of quality of life, and priorities in people with glaucoma

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Quality of life appears to be of increasing importance as a criterion for clinical intervention. However its meaning can be complex and its assessment varied. In social science the term has broad definitions which include terms such as autonomy, wellbeing; self esteem; sense of control etc. On the other hand within ophthalmology a narrower operational definition is mainly used which is the degree to which someone’s vision impacts on a range of necessary and desirable daily tasks a person wishes to carry out. The purpose of the presentation is to compare alternative methods of quality of life assessment. Methods The assessment approaches taken in the study range from conventional questionnaire rating scales, (something NICE has questioned) and time trade off comparisons, to more recent methods of scaling generated by for example Rasch or Hierarchical Bayesian analysis. Results Data will be presented from two studies (one in Edinburgh and one in Aberdeen) on quality of life in people with glaucoma. One of the new recommended discrete choice methods (Choice based conjoint analysis with Hierarchical Bayesian estimates) will be used. The results will include quality of life outcomes and their stability; related visual factors; comparisons across methods and more general implications for quality of life assessment. Conclusion Different methods for the assessment of quality of life produce different results with relatively low correlations between them although conjoint analysis has revealed stable priorities across two independent studies. These discrepancies in quality of life assessment require further study and evaluation.