Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular Surface Disease Index for dry eye disease

ObjectivesThe Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire is widely used to evaluate subjective symptoms of dry eye disease (DED) as a primary diagnostic criterion. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the OSDI (J-OSDI) and assess its reliability and validity.Design and settingHos...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ open 2019-11, Vol.9 (11), p.e033940-e033940
Hauptverfasser: Midorikawa-Inomata, Akie, Inomata, Takenori, Nojiri, Shuko, Nakamura, Masahiro, Iwagami, Masao, Fujimoto, Keiichi, Okumura, Yuichi, Iwata, Nanami, Eguchi, Atsuko, Hasegawa, Hitomi, Kinouchi, Hikaru, Murakami, Akira, Kobayashi, Hiroyuki
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ObjectivesThe Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire is widely used to evaluate subjective symptoms of dry eye disease (DED) as a primary diagnostic criterion. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the OSDI (J-OSDI) and assess its reliability and validity.Design and settingHospital-based cross-sectional observational study.ParticipantsA total of 209 patients recruited from the Department of Ophthalmology at Juntendo University Hospital.MethodsWe translated and culturally adapted the OSDI into Japanese. The J-OSDI was then assessed for internal consistency, reliability and validity. We also evaluated the optimal cut-off value to suspect DED using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis.Primary outcome measuresInternal consistency, test–retest reliability and discriminant validity of the J-OSDI as well as the optimal cut-off value to suspect DED.ResultsOf the participants, 152 had DED and 57 did not. The J-OSDI total score showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.884), test–retest reliability (interclass correlation coefficient=0.910) and discriminant validity by known-group comparisons (non-DED, 19.4±16.0; DED, 37.7±22.2; p
ISSN:2044-6055
2044-6055
DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033940