Cargando…

Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity

PURPOSE: We evaluated the validity of a single dry eye severity measure estimated using Rasch analysis from a battery of clinical tests and patient symptoms. METHODS: This study included 203 dry eye patients and 51 controls. Administered tests included the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karakus, Sezen, Akpek, Esen K., Agrawal, Devika, Massof, Robert W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6183328/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30323999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.7.5.26
_version_ 1783362698660020224
author Karakus, Sezen
Akpek, Esen K.
Agrawal, Devika
Massof, Robert W.
author_facet Karakus, Sezen
Akpek, Esen K.
Agrawal, Devika
Massof, Robert W.
author_sort Karakus, Sezen
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: We evaluated the validity of a single dry eye severity measure estimated using Rasch analysis from a battery of clinical tests and patient symptoms. METHODS: This study included 203 dry eye patients and 51 controls. Administered tests included the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear osmolarity, Schirmer's test, noninvasive break-up time, and ocular surface staining. Each of the 12 OSDI questions and each clinical test was defined to be a separate indicator to estimate a single dry eye severity measure from Rasch analysis. Measures of severity were estimated for each subject (person measures) and measures of sensitivity to severity were estimated for each sign and symptom (indicator measures). RESULTS: The average severity measure for dry eye patients was significantly greater than the average severity measure for controls (−0.39 vs. −1.2, P < 0.001). The distribution of indicator measures was well matched to the distribution of person measures. No indicator carried >10% of the total information about dry eye severity carried by all indicators together. However, the most informative indicators were corneal and conjunctival staining. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated that there is no single “best” dry eye test. Clinical tests and symptoms should be used in combination to estimate a single dry eye severity measure. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: There is no single “gold standard” testing method for dry eye that correlates with the severity of disease. We propose that Rasch analysis can be used to calculate an objective dry eye severity score from a battery of clinical indicators.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6183328
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61833282018-10-15 Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity Karakus, Sezen Akpek, Esen K. Agrawal, Devika Massof, Robert W. Transl Vis Sci Technol Articles PURPOSE: We evaluated the validity of a single dry eye severity measure estimated using Rasch analysis from a battery of clinical tests and patient symptoms. METHODS: This study included 203 dry eye patients and 51 controls. Administered tests included the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear osmolarity, Schirmer's test, noninvasive break-up time, and ocular surface staining. Each of the 12 OSDI questions and each clinical test was defined to be a separate indicator to estimate a single dry eye severity measure from Rasch analysis. Measures of severity were estimated for each subject (person measures) and measures of sensitivity to severity were estimated for each sign and symptom (indicator measures). RESULTS: The average severity measure for dry eye patients was significantly greater than the average severity measure for controls (−0.39 vs. −1.2, P < 0.001). The distribution of indicator measures was well matched to the distribution of person measures. No indicator carried >10% of the total information about dry eye severity carried by all indicators together. However, the most informative indicators were corneal and conjunctival staining. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated that there is no single “best” dry eye test. Clinical tests and symptoms should be used in combination to estimate a single dry eye severity measure. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: There is no single “gold standard” testing method for dry eye that correlates with the severity of disease. We propose that Rasch analysis can be used to calculate an objective dry eye severity score from a battery of clinical indicators. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2018-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6183328/ /pubmed/30323999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.7.5.26 Text en Copyright 2018 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Articles
Karakus, Sezen
Akpek, Esen K.
Agrawal, Devika
Massof, Robert W.
Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title_full Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title_fullStr Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title_full_unstemmed Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title_short Validation of an Objective Measure of Dry Eye Severity
title_sort validation of an objective measure of dry eye severity
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6183328/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30323999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.7.5.26
work_keys_str_mv AT karakussezen validationofanobjectivemeasureofdryeyeseverity
AT akpekesenk validationofanobjectivemeasureofdryeyeseverity
AT agrawaldevika validationofanobjectivemeasureofdryeyeseverity
AT massofrobertw validationofanobjectivemeasureofdryeyeseverity