Purchase this article with an account.
M. B. Colo, R. Coco, I. Fernández, S. Pastor; Telephone Satisfaction Questionnaire for Evaluation the Efficacy of a Vision Rehabilitation Treatment. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):3559.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To evaluate the efficacy of the service given to the Low Vision (LV) patients at IOBA Eye Institute, through a telephone satisfaction questionnaire during a 6 month’s period.
131 patients with LV were invited to answer a telephone satisfaction questionnaire with 12 items regarding the visual skills they had acquired with their optical devices, the frequency on its use, the adaptation to them and the subjective improvement in their quality of life.An average score was used as a quantitative measurement of each item. Global satisfaction and usefulness of the information given were rated on a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = not at all satisfied, 5 = very satisfied).
55 (42%) out of 131 patients answered the questionnaire. The average score of global satisfaction was 3.57±0.6. Three groups were detected according to the grade of global satisfaction: "very satisfied" patients (n=35), "satisfied" patients (n=8) and "little satisfied" patients (n=2). Ten patients could not be classified. These groups were compared with the rest of variables. The grade of global satisfaction (Kruskal-Wallis test 11.854; p = 0.002) and also the improvement in the quality of life (Fisher exact test 7.623; p = 0.049) were associated to the number of the optical devices used by the patient, being better the lesser devices they used. Mean score for the usefulness of the information given was 3.46±0.8. Management of optical devices was found to be easy or very easy in 45.5% (n=25). Nineteen patients (34.5%) used the devices several times a day. 35 patients had as a main goal to be able to read again, and 34 did get it. Nineteen patients (34%) considered the low vision training had improved their quality of life.
The results obtained showed a clear satisfaction with the information given, the goals achieved and the service received. Patients who used devices and those that stated to have subjectively improved more their quality of life were more satisfied with their vision rehabilitation treatment.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only