December 2002
Volume 43, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2002
Quality of life Dimenstions in Myopia
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • DB Erickson
    Psychology Univ of Sydney Sydney Australia
  • F Stapleton
    Crcert University of New South Wales Sydney Australia
  • P Erickson
    Crcert University of New South Wales Sydney Australia
  • E Giannakopoulos
    Crcert University of New South Wales Sydney Australia
  • B Holden
    Crcert University of New South Wales Sydney Australia
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   D.B. Erickson, None; F. Stapleton, None; P. Erickson, None; E. Giannakopoulos, None; B. Holden, None. Grant Identification: Funded under Australian Cooperative Research Centre Scheme
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 2002, Vol.43, 3817. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      DB Erickson, F Stapleton, P Erickson, E Giannakopoulos, B Holden; Quality of life Dimenstions in Myopia . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):3817.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: Based on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) literature, we hypothesised that HRQoL in myopia is modulated by several variables including frequency of visual compromise and ocular symptoms, individual tolerance of these symptoms and compromises, visual/auditory preferences, cosmesis and psychological factors such as sense of well-being, adaptability, self efficacy and extraversion. Methods: Item selection for all dimensions was based upon an extensive literature review and discussions with eyecare practitioners. Iterative pilot trials for item clarity and comprehension were conducted on optometric students, psychology students and eyecare practitioners. We then administered 112 of these HRQoL questions to 182 myopic subjects (1 to 6 D; Age 18-40 y) from certain refractive correction groups (spectacles alone = 57; daily wear soft lenses =55; continuous wear soft lenses = 27; LASIK = 15; spectacles plus daily wear soft lenses =28). 73% of this population reported satisfaction with their current refractive correction. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to demonstrate construct validity and begin final item selection. Results: Four factors accounting for 42% of the total variance emerged comprising 63 items. Factor 1 (21% of variance) comprised items examining tolerance of visual compromise and ocular symptomatology, factor 2 (9% of variance) comprised psychological items, factor 3 (6% of variance) comprised frequency of visual compromise and ocular symptomatology and factor 4 (6% of variance) included cosmesis items. Good internal consistency (Chronbach's alpha ≷=0.84) was demonstrated for each factor and for the overall model. Conclusions: Exploratory factor analysis on responses from a group of myopes predominantly satisfied with their refractive correction, yielded factors important in HRQoL including individual's tolerance of visual and ocular symptoms, psychological factors, frequency of experience of visual compromise and ocular symptoms, and cosmesis. Further development aims to elucidate factors which contribute to and predict the reasons for dissatisfaction with correction modality.

Keywords: 536 quality of life • 481 myopia • 357 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: treatment/prevention assessment/controlled clinical trials 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.