Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese

Purpose. To investigate the psychometric properties of three commonly used dry eye questionnaires including McMonnies Questionnaire (MQ), the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), and the Salisbury Eye Evaluation Questionnaire (SEEQ) in Chinese. Methods. This prospective cross-sectional study was con...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fan Lu, Aizhu Tao, Yinu Hu, Weiwei Tao, Ping Lu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2018-01-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/2401213
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832549515290214400
author Fan Lu
Aizhu Tao
Yinu Hu
Weiwei Tao
Ping Lu
author_facet Fan Lu
Aizhu Tao
Yinu Hu
Weiwei Tao
Ping Lu
author_sort Fan Lu
collection DOAJ
description Purpose. To investigate the psychometric properties of three commonly used dry eye questionnaires including McMonnies Questionnaire (MQ), the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), and the Salisbury Eye Evaluation Questionnaire (SEEQ) in Chinese. Methods. This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. Ninety-eight participants completed three questionnaires in a random order. Ophthalmic examinations including tear break-up time, corneal fluorescein staining score, and Schirmer I test were performed. Reliability, validity, and accuracy were assessed for three questionnaires. Results. There were 35 mild-to-moderate dry eye patients, 14 severe dry eye patients, and 49 non-dry eye patients. The Cronbach α of MQ, OSDI, and SEEQ was 0.54, 0.74, and 0.76, respectively, and the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.91, 0.90, and 0.94, respectively. There were significant differences (P<0.05) in MQ and OSDI scores among different groups, but there were no statistically significant differences between the mild-to-moderate group and the severe group in terms of SEEQ scores. With cutoff values for abnormal MQ of 15, OSDI of 27.2, and SEED of 1, respectively, good dry eye diagnostic accuracies were obtained. Conclusions. The three questionnaires showed fair accuracy in the diagnosis of dry eye. The cutoff values of OSDI changed when applied to Chinese people.
format Article
id doaj-art-5ed108845cc2425f874885bb895510de
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-004X
2090-0058
language English
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Ophthalmology
spelling doaj-art-5ed108845cc2425f874885bb895510de2025-02-03T06:11:11ZengWileyJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582018-01-01201810.1155/2018/24012132401213Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in ChineseFan Lu0Aizhu Tao1Yinu Hu2Weiwei Tao3Ping Lu4School of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, ChinaSchool of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, ChinaSchool of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, ChinaThe First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, ChinaSchool of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, ChinaPurpose. To investigate the psychometric properties of three commonly used dry eye questionnaires including McMonnies Questionnaire (MQ), the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), and the Salisbury Eye Evaluation Questionnaire (SEEQ) in Chinese. Methods. This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. Ninety-eight participants completed three questionnaires in a random order. Ophthalmic examinations including tear break-up time, corneal fluorescein staining score, and Schirmer I test were performed. Reliability, validity, and accuracy were assessed for three questionnaires. Results. There were 35 mild-to-moderate dry eye patients, 14 severe dry eye patients, and 49 non-dry eye patients. The Cronbach α of MQ, OSDI, and SEEQ was 0.54, 0.74, and 0.76, respectively, and the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.91, 0.90, and 0.94, respectively. There were significant differences (P<0.05) in MQ and OSDI scores among different groups, but there were no statistically significant differences between the mild-to-moderate group and the severe group in terms of SEEQ scores. With cutoff values for abnormal MQ of 15, OSDI of 27.2, and SEED of 1, respectively, good dry eye diagnostic accuracies were obtained. Conclusions. The three questionnaires showed fair accuracy in the diagnosis of dry eye. The cutoff values of OSDI changed when applied to Chinese people.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/2401213
spellingShingle Fan Lu
Aizhu Tao
Yinu Hu
Weiwei Tao
Ping Lu
Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
Journal of Ophthalmology
title Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
title_full Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
title_fullStr Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
title_short Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Three Common Dry Eye Questionnaires in Chinese
title_sort evaluation of reliability and validity of three common dry eye questionnaires in chinese
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/2401213
work_keys_str_mv AT fanlu evaluationofreliabilityandvalidityofthreecommondryeyequestionnairesinchinese
AT aizhutao evaluationofreliabilityandvalidityofthreecommondryeyequestionnairesinchinese
AT yinuhu evaluationofreliabilityandvalidityofthreecommondryeyequestionnairesinchinese
AT weiweitao evaluationofreliabilityandvalidityofthreecommondryeyequestionnairesinchinese
AT pinglu evaluationofreliabilityandvalidityofthreecommondryeyequestionnairesinchinese