한국안광학회지 (Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society)

한국안광학회 (The Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

안구건조증 설문지의 일치도 연구

Comparative Analysis of Questionnaires for Dry Eye Screening Test

  • 김다영 (강원대학교 안경광학과) ;
  • 이선행 (한국존슨앤드존슨 비젼케어) ;
  • 조현국 (강원대학교 안경광학과) ;
  • 김건규 (강원대학교 안경광학과) ;
  • 김하나 (강원대학교 안경광학과) ;
  • 문병연 (강원대학교 안경광학과)
  • 투고 : 2014.11.04
  • 심사 : 2014.12.09
  • 발행 : 2014.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적: 안구건조증 평가를 위한 세 종류의 설문지와 타각적 검사의 일치도를 비교하였다. 방법: 성인 90명을 대상으로 세 종류의 설문지(SPEED, OSDI, TERTC-DEQ)와 타각적 검사(NIBUT, Schirmer test)를 시행하여 건성안과 정상안을 구분하고 세 설문지와 타각적 검사의 일치도를 비교, 분석하였다. 결과: NIBUT 검사와 각 설문지 간의 일치도는 SPEED의 경우 83.3%, OSDI의 경우 77.8%, TERTC의 경우 72.3%로, SPEED가 가장 높은 일치도를 보였다. Schirmer test와 각 설문지 간의 일치도는 SPEED의 경우 57.8%, OSDI의 경우 58.9%, TERTC의 경우 73.3%로, TERTC가 일치도는 높았지만 전반적으로 Schirmer test에서는 NIBUT 검사보다 낮은 일치도를 나타냈다. 결론: 안구건조증은 SPEED의 설문지가 타각적 검사와 가장 높은 일치도를 보였으며, SPEED가 안구건조증 평가에 유용하게 사용할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

Purpose: This study is to evaluate the accuracy of dry eye screening test by comparing coincidences between three types of questionnaires and objective tests. Methods: 90 adults were classified into the normal and dry eye groups using evaluations of three types of questionnaires (SPEED, OSDI, TERTC-DEQ) and objective tests (NIBUT, Schirmer test). Coincidences-between the results of objective tests and questionnaires were compared and analyzed for dry eye diagnosis. Results: Coincidences between NIBUT test and each questionnaire were 83.3% by SPEED, 77.8% by OSDI and 72.3% by TERTC-DEQ, respectively. Concordance by SPEED was highest among three types of questionnaire. Coincidences between the Schirmer test and each questionnaire were 57.8% by SPEED, 58.9% by OSDI and 73.3% by TERTC-DEQ, respectively, thus coincidence by TERTC was higher than by others. But coincidences by Schirmer test were generally lower than those by NIBUT test. Conclusions: SPEED questionnaire showed the highest concordance with objective test as compared with others. Therefore, SPEED is expected to be used usefully to diagnose dry eyes.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Zeev MSB, Miller DD, Latkany R. Diagnosis of dry eye disease and emerging technologies. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:581-590.
  2. Ngo W, Situ P, Keir N, Korb D, Blackie C, Simpson T. Psychometric properties and validation of the standard patient evaluation of eye dryness questionnaire. Cornea. 2013;32(9):1204-1210. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e318294b0c0
  3. Lemp MA, Foulks GN. The definition & classification of dry eye disease: report of the definition and classification subcommittee of the international dry eye workshop. Ocul Surf. 2007;5(2):75-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1542-0124(12)70081-2
  4. Cho JH, Ahn Y. Assessment of meibomian gland dysfunction and comparison of the results of BUT and Schirmer test according to meibomian gland state. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2000;41(9):1875-1882.
  5. Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G, Hirsch JD, Reis BL. Reliability and validity of the ocular surface disease index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118(5):615-621. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.118.5.615
  6. Narayanan S, Miller WL, Prager TC, Jackson JA, Leach NE, McDermott AM, et al. The diagnosis and characteristics of moderate dry eye in non-contact lens wearers. Eye contact lens. 2005;(31)3:96-104. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000140907.45705.E2
  7. Nichols KK, Begley CG, Caffery B, Jones LA. Symptoms of ocular irritation in patients diagnosed with dry eye. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76(12):838-844. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-199912000-00019
  8. Yun CM, Kang SY, Kim HM, Song JS. Prevalence of dry eye disease among university students. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012;53(4):505-509. https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2012.53.4.505
  9. Miller KL, Walt JG, Mink DR, Satram-Hoang S, Wilson SE, Perry HD, et al. Minimal clinically important difference for the ocular surface disease index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128(1):94-101. https://doi.org/10.1001/archophthalmol.2009.356
  10. Kim JM, Kim YH, Jung JH. Use of the Texas Eye Research and Technology Center Dry Eye Questionaire (TERTC-DEQ) as a screening survey for contact lens wearers and nonwearers. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc. 2007;12(4):127-131.
  11. Sun JS, Ryu GC, Cho JH. Development of dry eye questionnaire easy to use in optical shops. J Korean Vis Sci. 2013;15(4):385-393.
  12. Lee BJ, Hong JH, Jung DI, Park MJ. A study on the confidence of dry eye diagnosis methods. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc. 2008;13(1):15-20.
  13. Lee JY, Seo JI, Jang WY. Optometric Instruments, 1st Ed. Seoul: Shinkwang, 2007;164.
  14. Seol BR, Kwon JW, Wee WR, Han YK. A case of meibomian gland dysfunction after cosmetic eyelid tattooing procedure. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013;54(8):1309-1313. https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2013.54.8.1309
  15. Jung DI, Lee HS, Kim SR, Park MJ. The difference of tear break-up time by the fitting states of soft contact lens in normal and dry eyes. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc.2010;15(4):339-346.
  16. Korb DR, Herman JP Greiner JV, Scaffidi RC, Finnemore VM, Exford JM, et al. Lid wiper epitheliopathy and dry eye symptoms. Eye contact lens. 2005;31(1):2-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000140910.03095.FA
  17. Grubbs JR Jr, Tolleson-Rinehart S, Huynh K, Davis RM. A review of quality of life measures in dry eye questionnaires. Cornea. 2014;33(2):215-218. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000000038

피인용 문헌

  1. Changes in Subjective/Objective Symptoms and Lens Parameters by the Education for Cosmetic Contact Lens Care vol.21, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14479/jkoos.2016.21.4.361
  2. The Effect of Fatigue and Stress on Dry eye vol.19, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.17337/jmbi.2017.19.3.323