This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bailey MD, Mitchell GL, Dhaliwal DK et al (2003) Patient satisfaction and visual symptoms after laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 110:1371–1378
Ben-Sira A, Loewenstein A, Lipshitz I et al (1997) Patient satisfaction after 5.0-mm photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. J Refract Surg 13:129–134
Berry S, Mangione CM, Lindblad AS et al (2003) Development of the National Eye Institute refractive error correction quality of life questionnaire: focus groups. Ophthalmology 110:2285–2291
Brunette I, Gresset J, Boivin JF et al (2000) Functional outcome and satisfaction after photorefractive keratectomy. Part 2: survey of 690 patients. Ophthalmology 107:1790–1796
Garamendi E, Pesudovs K, Elliott DB (2005) Changes in quality of life after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:1537–1543
Hays RD, Mangione CM, Ellwein L et al (2003) Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument. Ophthalmology 110:2292–2301
Hill JC (2002) An informal satisfaction survey of 200 patients after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg 18:454–459
Lee J, Park K, Cho W et al (2005) Assessing the value of laser in situ keratomileusis by patient-reported outcomes using quality of life assessment. J Refract Surg 21:59–71
Likert RA (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 140:1–55
Mangione CM, Phillips RS, Seddon JM et al (1992) Development of the “Activities of Daily Vision Scale.” A measure of visual functional status. Med Care 30:1111–1126
Massof RW (2002) The measurement of vision disability. Optom Vis Sci 79:516–552
McDonnell PJ, Mangione C, Lee P et al (2003) Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument to surgical correction of refractive error. Ophthalmology 110:2302–2309
McGhee CN, Craig JP, Sachdev N et al (2000) Functional, psychological, and satisfaction outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 26:497–509
Nichols JJ, Twa MD, Mitchell GL (2005) Sensitivity of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument to refractive surgery outcomes. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:2313–2318
Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB (2004) The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci 81:769–777
Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB (2006) A quality of life comparison of people wearing spectacles or contact lenses or having undergone refractive surgery. J Refract Surg 22:19–27
Schein OD (2000) The measurement of patient-reported out-comes of refractive surgery: the refractive status and vision profile. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 98:439–469
Schein OD, Vitale S, Cassard SD et al (2001) Patient outcomes of refractive surgery. The refractive status and vision profile. J Cataract Refract Surg 27:665–673
Waring GO, 3rd (2000) Standard graphs for reporting refractive surgery. J Refract Surg 16:459–466
Wright BD, Masters GN (1982) Rating Scale Analysis. MESA Press, Chicago
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pesudovs, K. (2008). Influence of Refractive Surgery Complications on Quality of Life. In: Alió, J.L., Azar, D.T. (eds) Management of Complications in Refractive Surgery. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37584-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37584-5_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-37583-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-37584-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)