advertisement

---

Editors Selection IGR 9-2

Quality of Life

Comment by Don Budenz on:

18059 Severity of visual field loss and health-related quality of life, McKean-Cowdin R; Varma R; Wu J et al., American Journal of Ophthalmology, 2007; 143: 1013-1023

See also comment(s) by Pamela Sample •

Find related abstracts

---

McKean-Cowdin et al. (399) report the association between peripheral visual field loss and health- and vision-related quality of life (QOL) scales in a population study, the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES). LALES was designed to determine the prevalence of visual disorders in Latinos age forty and over residing in Los Angeles, California. As part of that study,SITA Standard Humphrey visual fields were performed in each eye and several QOL scales were obtained, one general health-related (the SF-12) and one vision-related (the NEI VFQ-14). The authors then performed linear regression analysis using the mean deviation from the visual fields as the dependent variable and several independent variables, including QOL scores.

Prevention of visual field loss, even at early stages, may be important for preserving quality

An analysis of covariance was also performed to make sure things like age were not responsible for any associations between visual field loss and QOL. They found that vision-related QOL scores are adversely affected by severity of visual field loss in a linear manner and that even mild visual field loss can affect QOL indicators, especially visual field loss in the worse seeing eye. The specific factors that were affected most by visual field loss were difficulties driving, distance and peripheral vision activities, and sense of independence. The results imply that prevention of visual field loss, even at early stages, may be important for preserving quality of life. Limitations of the study include the lack of cultural diversity (only studied Latinos residing in Los Angeles, primarily Mexican-Americans), monocular, rather than binocular field testing (the latter better reflecting functional peripheral vision), and the lack of glaucoma-specific diagnosis (since there was no attempt made to analyze the cause of the visual field loss in this side study).

---

• ← Previous
• Next →

---