Article Text

PDF
Development of a Chinese version of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (CHI-VFQ-25) as a tool to study patients with eye diseases in Hong Kong
  1. C W S Chan1,
  2. D Wong1,
  3. C L K Lam2,
  4. S McGhee3,
  5. W W Lai1
  1. 1
    Eye Institute, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong
  2. 2
    Department of Medicine (FMU), The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong
  3. 3
    Department of Community Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong
  1. Correspondence to Dr W W Lai, The Eye Institute, The University of Hong Kong, Room 301, Block B, Cyberport 4, 100 Cyberport Road, Hong Kong; wicolai{at}hku.hk

Abstract

Background: To develop a Chinese version of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (CHI-VFQ-25) and to test its reliability and validity in a group of patients with eye diseases in Hong Kong.

Methods: The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) was translated into Chinese. Patients were recruited from Hong Kong, and their demographic data and visual acuity were documented. Psychometric properties of the CHI-VFQ-25, including internal consistency, test–retest reliability, item–scale correlations and construct validity were tested.

Results: 250 patients were recruited. The mean age of the patients was 66.04 (SD 14.00). 46% of them were male. The non-response rate and the floor and ceiling numbers of the CHI-VFQ-25 were calculated. The internal consistency was high in most subscales (except the general health and driving subscales), with Cronbach α ranging from 0.72–0.90. The test–retest reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.90). Patients with worse visual acuity had significantly lower scores on the CHI-VFQ-25 supporting construct validity.

Conclusion: The CHI-VFQ-25 is a reliable and valid tool for assessing the visual functions of Chinese patients with eye diseases in Hong Kong. Some questions had high non-response rates and should be substituted by the available alternatives.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Funding This study is supported in part by the Seed Funding Program and the University Development Fund, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by Institutional Review Board, The University of Hong Kong.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.