Perspectives of Patients and Professionals on Implementing a Computer Adaptive Vision-Related Quality of Life Outcome (CAT-EyeQ) in Clinical Practice

Purpose

The CAT-EyeQ is a computer adaptive test (CAT) which measures vision-related quality of life in patients having exudative retinal diseases. The aim of this study is to investigate the usability of the CAT-EyeQ in clinical practice and identify potential barriers and facilitators for implementation (problem analysis).

Methods

Patients and health care professionals participated in the study regarding the usability of the CAT-EyeQ, and clinic managers and health care professionals were included in the problem analysis for implementation. In total, we conducted 18 semi-structured interviews. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to develop the interview guides and to structure results.

Results

Six themes were derived from the usability study and problem analysis: (1) quality of the CAT-EyeQ and the applicability to patients' needs and preferences, (2) embedding the CAT-EyeQ in current practice, (3) implementation climate of the eye hospitals, (4) attitude of professionals, (5) engaging and encouraging professionals, and (6) integration of the CAT-EyeQ in health care - needs after piloting.

Conclusions

Patients and professionals mentioned that the CAT-EyeQ improved insight into the impact of eye diseases on a patient's daily life, it allowed for more attention on the patient perspective and the structured measurement of vision-related quality of life. The main perceived barriers mentioned by professionals for using the CAT-EyeQ were lack of time and the integration of the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) results within the electronic patient record (EPR).

Translational Relevance

The CAT-EyeQ, accompanied by an overview of stakeholder perspectives resulting from this implementation study, can now be used in clinical practice.

Translation and content validity of the Dutch Impact of Vision Impairment questionnaire assessed by Three-Step Test-Interviewing

BACKGROUND

Patients suffering from exsudative retinal diseases may experience severe central vision loss and this might have impact on their daily activities and quality of life. To measure the disabilities these patients may have, the use of the Impact of Vision Impairment Profile questionnaire is recommended. The aim of this study was to translate the original English 28-item Impact of Vision Impairment Profile (IVI) into the Dutch language and evaluate its comprehensibility, comprehensiveness and relevance as evidence of content validity. The translation process was performed using standardized methods. Content validity was assessed by cognitive debriefing using a Three-Step Test-Interview (TSTI) method for participants diagnosed with exudative retinal diseases. Step 1 and 2 focused on assessment of comprehensibility of items, step 3 on comprehensiveness and relevance. Audio-recorded qualitative data was analyzed using Atlas.ti. Data regarding comprehensibility problems was further categorized into item-specific problems and general problems.

RESULTS

Few minor discrepancies in wording were found after translation. After conducting 12 cognitive interviews, data saturation was reached. All participants reported comprehensibility problems resulting from specific items, these were; sentence structure, vocabulary and formulation, influence of conditions or composite items and influence of comorbid disorders. Several general comprehensibility problems resulting from instructions or response categories were detected. The main general comprehensibility problem resulted from the layout of the Dutch-IVI. Most participants considered the included items as relevant and indicated that they covered the problems that occur due to vision impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

Minor problems in the Dutch translation were detected and adjusted. The layout and instructions of the Dutch-IVI resulted in some comprehensibility problems. The Dutch-IVI appeared to be at risk of being interpreted as a generic patient reported outcome measure, instead of a disease-specific instrument, mainly due to the influence of co-morbidities. Adaptations should improve validity and reliability of the Dutch-IVI, however, cross-cultural comparisons may be at stake.