Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Low-Vision Rehabilitation Using Two Questionnaires and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health
Issued Date
2024-01-01
Resource Type
eISSN
22288082
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85206599773
Journal Title
Siriraj Medical Journal
Volume
76
Issue
10
Start Page
661
End Page
671
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Siriraj Medical Journal Vol.76 No.10 (2024) , 661-671
Suggested Citation
Chotikavanich S., Eiamsamang A., Layangool T., Krutthong W., Loket S., Yingyong R., Dongngam S., Nujoi W., Jai-ai J., Sarinak N., Eksupapan E., Sagan S., Chaowalitwong P. Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Low-Vision Rehabilitation Using Two Questionnaires and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Siriraj Medical Journal Vol.76 No.10 (2024) , 661-671. 671. doi:10.33192/SMJ.V76I10.268929 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/101755
Title
Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Low-Vision Rehabilitation Using Two Questionnaires and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a low-vision service by using three tools and to identify the specific outcomes obtained from each instrument. Materials and Methods: Patients consecutively visiting the low-vision clinic at Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, were enrolled. The impact of the prescribed rehabilitation on patient quality of life was measured using three tools: the Low-Vision Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire (LVQOL); the generic EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire (EQ-5D); and the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF). Results: Out of the 104 patients recruited, 76 patients (mean age, 53 ± 16.2 years) completed the questionnaires before and after rehabilitation, which was assessed after 5.8 ± 2.0 months. Post-rehabilitation, the time of followup, patients had significant improvements in the mean scores of both the LVQOL scores and mean EQ-5D scores compared to before rehabilitation (P < 0.001), with Cohen’s effect sizes of 0.85 and 0.67, respectively. Subgroup analyses by age, severity, and cause of visual impairment also showed significant improvements in the LVQOL (P < 0.05), but not the EQ-5D score in the blindness severity subgroup. The ICF scores also showed significant improvement in most domains, including seeing functions, mobility across different locations, transportation use, meal preparation, economic self-sufficiency, community life, and recreational activities (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Patients with low vision experienced significant improvements following vision rehabilitation, especially in terms of seeing functions and mobility. Evaluation by different questionnaire types could provide additional information. The WHO-ICF was effective in assessing each domain related to activity performance and participation.