Purchase this article with an account.
J.J. Nichols, G.L. Mitchell, K.K. Nichols; Assessment of the Reliability of Self–Reported Dry Eye in Contact Lens Wearers: The Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire (CLDEQ) Short–Form . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004;45(13):3453.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Purpose: The CLDEQ short–form demonstrates good accuracy in predicting a doctor’s diagnosis of contact lens–related dry eye (Nichols and coworkers, Cornea 2003;21:469–475). The purpose of this report is to assess the reliability of patient–reported responses to questions on the CLDEQ short–form. Methods: The CLDEQ short–form was administered on two occasions to a sample of contact lens wearers. The survey consists of three main questions predictive of contact lens–related dry eye: dryness, light sensitivity, and a self–perception question. For dryness and light sensitivity, the subject is asked the frequency of the symptom, followed by the intensity of the symptom at three times throughout the day: morning, midday, and evening. The responses to the questions are scored by multiplying the frequency by the average intensity, which are then used in the algorithm from logistic regression: p (contact lens–related dry eye | score = self–diagnosis and dryness) = (1 + e 2.72–1.26(self–perception)– 0.18(dryness) + 0.10(photophobia))–1. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman method of 95% limits of agreement were used to assess the test–retest reliability of the composite scale. Results: One hundred eighteen contact lens wearers were included (median age = 26 years, 64% female). The mean difference between administrations was 39 ± 29 days. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the composite score was 0.69 (95% confidence interval = 0.55 to 0.78). The mean difference in the composite CLDEQ score between visits was –0.01 ± 0.73, which did not statistically differ from zero (t = –0.21, p = 0.83). The 95% limits of agreement were –1.44 to 1.41. Test–retest reliability was not related to the overall score (r = 0.12, p = 0.19), patient age (r = 0.01, p = 0.93), days between administrations (r = 0.11, p = 0.27), or gender (mean difference between genders = 0.19 ± 0.72, t= 1.53, p = 0.13). Conclusions: There is moderate self–reported test–retest reliability in patients with contact lens–related dry eye. The instrument should be administered on more than one occasion before disease classification can be made.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only