| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.01 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Abstract(s)
Objetivos: Este estudo teve como objetivo principal a validação clínica do questionário
Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness versão portuguesa (SPEED-vp). O trabalho
está dividido em duas partes. Primeiro foi avaliado o melhor o ponto de corte do SPEEDvp, e segundo foi estimada a prevalência da síndrome de olho seco (SOS) e a sua
correlação entre sintomas e sinais clínicos.
Metodologia: Num primeiro estudo foi efetuada a validação do questionário SPEED-vp
como ferramenta de avaliação sintomática da SOS através do questionário standard
Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) (versão portuguesa). Foram considerados 182
sujeitos com idades compreendidas entre os 19 e os 96 anos. Todos os participantes
preencheram os questionários SPEED-vp e OSDI. No segundo estudo foram
considerados 101 sujeitos com idades compreendidas entre os 19 e os 88 anos. Neste
estudo, os sujeitos preencherem o questionário SPEED-vp e realizaram a avaliação do
estado lacrimal (Keratograph Oculus 5M). A prevalência da SOS foi determinada
segundo os critérios de diagnóstico propostos pela TFOS DWES II (2017).
Resultados: O primeiro estudo mostrou que o questionário SPEED-vp tem uma
confiabilidade excelente (Alpha de Cronbach de 0,824) e similar ao questionário OSDI
(Alpha de Cronbach de 0,835). A curva ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) ,
revelou que o ponto 8 é o melhor ponto de corte para o questionário SPEED-vp
(sensibilidade de 71,2% e especificidade de 71%). O segundo estudo obteve uma
prevalência de 51% para a SOS e destes, 51% apresentam a tipologia de SOS evaporativo,
35% apresentam SOS misto e 2% apresentam SOS com deficiência aquosa. Não se
encontraram correlações entre sinais clínicos e sintomas.
Conclusão: O questionário SPEED-vp é uma ferramenta fiável na quantificação de
sintomas da SOS numa população de adultos portugueses de faixa etária ampla. A
prevalência estimada da SOS (51%) foi semelhante em alguns estudos que utilizaram
uma metodologia idêntica e superior em relação a estudos de meta-análise, como o
estudo epidemiológico da TFOS DWES II (2017) (8,7% - 30,1%). À semelhança do que
tem sido reportado em estudos semelhantes, não se encontraram correlações entre
sintomas e sinais clínicos.
Objectives: The main objective of this study was the clinical validation of the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version (SPEED-vp) questionnaire. The study is divided into two parts. First, the best cut-off point for the SPEED-vp was evaluated, and second, the prevalence of dry eye syndrome (SOS) and its correlation with clinical symptoms and signs were estimated. Methodology: The first study validated the SPEED-vp questionnaire as a tool for assessing symptomatic SOS using the standardized Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire (Portuguese version). The study included 182 subjects aged between 19 and 96. All participants completed the SPEED-vp and OSDI questionnaires. The second study included 101 subjects aged between 19 and 88. In this study, the subjects filled in the SPEED-vp questionnaire and had their tear status assessed (Keratograph Oculus 5M). The prevalence of SOS was determined according to the diagnostic criteria proposed by TFOS DWES II (2017). Results: The first study showed that the SPEED-vp questionnaire has excellent reliability (Cronbach's Alpha of 0.824) and is similar to the OSDI questionnaire (Cronbach's Alpha of 0.835). The ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) curve revealed that point 8 is the best cut-off point for the SPEED-vp questionnaire (sensitivity of 71.2% and specificity of 71%). The second study found a prevalence of 51% for SOS and of these, 51% had evaporative SOS, 35% had mixed SOS and 2% had aqueous deficiency SOS. No correlations were found between clinical signs and symptoms. Conclusion: The SPEED-vp questionnaire is a reliable tool for quantifying symptoms of SOS in a population of Portuguese adults with a wide age range. The estimated prevalence of SOS (51%) was similar in some studies that used an identical methodology and higher in relation to meta-analysis studies, such as the TFOS DWES II epidemiological study (2017) (8.7% - 30.1%). As has been reported in similar studies, no correlations were found between symptoms and clinical signs.
Objectives: The main objective of this study was the clinical validation of the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version (SPEED-vp) questionnaire. The study is divided into two parts. First, the best cut-off point for the SPEED-vp was evaluated, and second, the prevalence of dry eye syndrome (SOS) and its correlation with clinical symptoms and signs were estimated. Methodology: The first study validated the SPEED-vp questionnaire as a tool for assessing symptomatic SOS using the standardized Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire (Portuguese version). The study included 182 subjects aged between 19 and 96. All participants completed the SPEED-vp and OSDI questionnaires. The second study included 101 subjects aged between 19 and 88. In this study, the subjects filled in the SPEED-vp questionnaire and had their tear status assessed (Keratograph Oculus 5M). The prevalence of SOS was determined according to the diagnostic criteria proposed by TFOS DWES II (2017). Results: The first study showed that the SPEED-vp questionnaire has excellent reliability (Cronbach's Alpha of 0.824) and is similar to the OSDI questionnaire (Cronbach's Alpha of 0.835). The ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) curve revealed that point 8 is the best cut-off point for the SPEED-vp questionnaire (sensitivity of 71.2% and specificity of 71%). The second study found a prevalence of 51% for SOS and of these, 51% had evaporative SOS, 35% had mixed SOS and 2% had aqueous deficiency SOS. No correlations were found between clinical signs and symptoms. Conclusion: The SPEED-vp questionnaire is a reliable tool for quantifying symptoms of SOS in a population of Portuguese adults with a wide age range. The estimated prevalence of SOS (51%) was similar in some studies that used an identical methodology and higher in relation to meta-analysis studies, such as the TFOS DWES II epidemiological study (2017) (8.7% - 30.1%). As has been reported in similar studies, no correlations were found between symptoms and clinical signs.
Description
Keywords
Diagnóstico Doença da Superfície Ocular Olho Seco Questionário Sinais Clínicos Sintomas