Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of photodynamic therapy for age related macular degeneration upon subjective vision related quality of life

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been used in the treatment of choroidal neovascularisation secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD). This study prospectively investigated patients’ subjective change in visual function following PDT as treatment for AMD.

Methods

Eighty-two consecutive patients receiving PDT in Tasmania, Australia, between May and November 2003 were recruited. In conjunction with a comprehensive clinical examination, the Visual Function-14 (VF-14) questionnaire was administered. Final follow-up occurred between February and March 2005. The VF-14 was scored by traditional summary scoring and by Rasch analysis.

Results

Five of the 82 (6.1%) subjects recruited were excluded from analysis. PDT was performed on average 5.7±2.6 times per patient. Raw VF-14 scores tended towards being significantly lower at follow-up than at baseline (67.6±27.2 against 64.5±27.7; P=0.052), and did significantly deteriorate using a collapsed Rasch analysis (P=0.0102). Following treatment, 38 (47.5%) eyes had lost three or more Snellen lines of best-corrected visual acuity.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing PDT typically report reasonable visual function. In parallel with visual acuity, self-reported visual function may deteriorate slightly after PDT for AMD, but not as much as reported in untreated AMD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alonso J, Espallargues M, Andersen TF et al (1997) International applicability of the VF-14. An index of visual function in patients with cataracts. Ophthalmology 104:799–807

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Andrich D (1978) A rating scale formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 43:561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Armbrecht AM, Aspinall PA, Dhillon B (2004) A prospective study of visual function and quality of life following PDT in patients with wet age related macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol 88:1270–1273

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Attebo K, Mitchell P, Smith W (1996) Visual acuity and the causes of visual loss in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 103:357–364

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Barnes RM, Gee L, Taylor S, Briggs MC, Harding SP (2004) Outcomes in verteporfin photodynamic therapy for choroidal neovascularisation—’beyond the TAP study’. Eye 18:809–813

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Blinder KJ, Bradley S, Bressler NM et al (2003) Effect of lesion size, visual acuity, and lesion composition on visual acuity change with and without verteporfin therapy for choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration: TAP and VIP report no. 1. Am J Ophthalmol 136:407–418

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Blumenkranz MS, Bressler NM, Bressler SB et al (2002) Verteporfin therapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration: three-year results of an open-label extension of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP Report no. 5. Arch Ophthalmol 120:1307–1314

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bressler NM (2001) Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: two-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—tap report 2. Arch Ophthalmol 119:198–207

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Essex RW, Qureshi SH, Cain MS, Harper CA, Guymer RH (2003) Photodynamic therapy in practice: a review of the results of the first 12 months experience with verteporfin at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 31:476–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Evans JR, Fletcher AE, Wormald RP (2004) Age-related macular degeneration causing visual impairment in people 75 years or older in Britain: an add-on study to the Medical Research Council Trial of Assessment and Management of Older People in the Community. Ophthalmology 111:513–517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Foran S, Wang JJ, Rochtchina E, Mitchell P (2000) Projected number of Australians with visual impairment in 2000 and 2030. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 28:143–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Haddad WM, Coscas G, Soubrane G (2002) Eligibility for treatment and angiographic features at the early stage of exudative age related macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol 86:663–669

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Krummenauer F, Braun M, Dick HB (2005) Clinical outcome and subjective quality of life after photodynamic therapy in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Eur J Ophthalmol 15:74–80

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Linacre JM (1999) Investigating rating scale category utility. J Outcome Meas 3:122

    Google Scholar 

  15. Facets Rasch measurement computer program. [computer program]. Linacre JM. Winsteps.com, Chicago, 2004

  16. Linder M, Chang TS, Scott IU et al (1999) Validity of the visual function index (VF-14) in patients with retinal disease. Arch Ophthalmol 117:1611–1616

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mackenzie PJ, Chang TS, Scott IU et al (2002) Assessment of vision-related function in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 109:720–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mackenzie P, Chang T, Scott I et al (2002) Assessment of vision-related function in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 109:729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mitchell P, Wang JJ, Foran S, Smith W (2002) Five-year incidence of age-related maculopathy lesions: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 109:1092–1097

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mukesh BN, Dimitrov PN, Leikin S et al (2004) Five-year incidence of age-related maculopathy: the Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmology 111:1176–1182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Norquist J, Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J, Jenkinson C (2005) Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Med Care 42:I25–136

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB (2004) The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci 81:769–777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Keeves JP, Elliott DB (2003) The Activities of Daily Vision Scale for cataract surgery outcomes: re-evaluating validity with Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:2892–2899

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Reinke MH, Canakis C, Husain D et al (1999) Verteporfin photodynamic therapy retreatment of normal retina and choroid in the cynomolgus monkey. Ophthalmology 106:1915–1923

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Riusala A, Sarna S, Immonen I (2003) Visual function index (VF-14) in exudative age-related macular degeneration of long duration. Am J Ophthalmol 135:206–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schnurrbusch UE, Welt K, Horn LC, Wiedemann P, Wolf S (2001) Histological findings of surgically excised choroidal neovascular membranes after photodynamic therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 85:1086–1091

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sharma S, Hollands H, Brown GC, Brown MM, Shah GK, Sharma SM (2001) Improvement in quality of life from photodynamic therapy: a Canadian perspective. Can J Ophthalmol 36:332–338

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Soubrane G, Bressler NM (2001) Treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation in age related macular degeneration: focus on clinical application of verteporfin photodynamic therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 85:483–495

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al (1994) The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 112:630–638

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Stelmack J, Szlyk J, Stelmack T et al (2004) Psychometric properties of the Veterans Affairs Low-Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45:3919–3928

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Talks SJ, Setty R, Clarke L (2004) The incidence and outcome of photodynamic therapy for macular degeneration in the Northern region of the UK. Eye 18:588–594

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. The TAP Study Group (1999) Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: one-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP report. Treatment of age-related macular degeneration with photodynamic therapy (TAP) Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol 117:1329–1345

    Google Scholar 

  33. Valderas J, Alonso J, Prieto L, Espallargues M, Castells X (2004) Content-based interpretation aids for health-related quality of life measures in clinical practice. An example for the visual function index (VF-14). Qual Life Res 13:35–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. VanNewkirk MR, Nanjan MB, Wang JJ, Mitchell P, Taylor HR, McCarty CA (2000) The prevalence of age-related maculopathy: the visual impairment project. Ophthalmology 107:1593–1600

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Velozo C, Lai J, Mallinson T, Hauselman E (2000) Maintaining instrument quality while reducing items: application of Rasch analysis to a self-report of visual function. J Outcome Meas 4:667–680

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Weih L, McCarty CA, Taylor HR (2000) Functional implications of vision impairment. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 28:153–155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wolfe E, Chiu C (1999) Measuring pretest-posttest change with a Rasch rating scale model. J Outcome Meas 3:134–161

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the staff at the Hobart Eye Surgeons for their recruitment of patients and Dr. Colin Chan, who kindly assisted with initial data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Hobart Hospital, 7000, Tasmania, Australia

    Alex W. Hewitt, V. Swetha Jeganathan & Nitin Verma

  2. NH&MRC Centre for Clinical Eye Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Flinders Medical Centre and Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia

    Alex W. Hewitt & Konrad Pesudovs

  3. Hobart Eye Surgeons, Tasmania, Australia

    Juanita E. Kidd & Nitin Verma

Authors
  1. Alex W. Hewitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V. Swetha Jeganathan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juanita E. Kidd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Konrad Pesudovs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nitin Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex W. Hewitt.

Additional information

The authors have no commercial interest or conflicts of interest in this publication

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hewitt, A.W., Jeganathan, V.S., Kidd, J.E. et al. Influence of photodynamic therapy for age related macular degeneration upon subjective vision related quality of life. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmo 244, 972–977 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-005-0218-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-005-0218-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation