Dataset Information

A Global Assessment of Eye Health and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

More than 1 billion people worldwide have vision impairment or blindness from potentially preventable or correctable causes. Quality of life, an important measure of physical, emotional, and social well-being, appears to be negatively associated with vision impairment, and increasingly, ophthalmic interventions are being assessed for their association with quality of life.

Objective

To examine the association between vision impairment or eye disease and quality of life, and the outcome of ophthalmic interventions on quality of life globally and across the life span, through an umbrella review or systematic review of systematic reviews.

Evidence review

The electronic databases MEDLINE, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Proquest Dissertations, and Theses Global were searched from inception through June 29, 2020, using a comprehensive search strategy. Systematic reviews addressing vision impairment, eye disease, or ophthalmic interventions and quantitatively or qualitatively assessing health-related, vision-related, or disease-specific quality of life were included. Article screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction were performed by 4 reviewers working independently and in duplicate. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal and data extraction forms for umbrella reviews were used.

Findings

Nine systematic reviews evaluated the association between quality of life and vision impairment, age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, or mendelian eye conditions (including retinitis pigmentosa). Of these, 5 were reviews of quantitative observational studies, 3 were reviews of qualitative studies, and 1 was a review of qualitative and quantitative studies. All found an association between vision impairment and lower quality of life. Sixty systematic reviews addressed at least 1 ophthalmic intervention in association with quality of life. Overall, 33 unique interventions were investigated, of which 25 were found to improve quality of life compared with baseline measurements or a group receiving no intervention. These interventions included timely cataract surgery, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for age-related macular degeneration, and macular edema.

Conclusions and relevance

There is a consistent association between vision impairment, eye diseases, and reduced quality of life. These findings support pursuing ophthalmic interventions, such as timely cataract surgery and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, for common retinal diseases, where indicated, to improve quality of life for millions of people globally each year.

SUBMITTER: Assi L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7881366 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionVision impairment and eye disease are major global health concerns and have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and lower quality of life. Quality of life, whether generic, vision-specific or disease-specific, is an important measure of the impact of eye health on people's daily activities, well-being and visual function, and is increasingly used to evaluate the impact of ophthalmic interventions and new devices. While many studies and reviews have examined the relationship between vision or eye health and quality of life across different contexts, there has yet to be a synthesis of the impact of vision impairment, eye disease and ophthalmic interventions on quality of life globally and across the lifespan.Methods and analysisAn umbrella review of systematic reviews will be conducted to address these two questions: (1) What is the association of vision impairment and eye disease with quality of life? (2) What is the impact of ophthalmic interventions on quality of life? A search of related literature will be performed on the 11 February 2020 in Medline Ovid, Embase.com, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and the grey literature, and repeated at the synthesis stage. Title/abstract and full-text screening, methodological quality assessment and data extraction will be conducted by reviewers working independently and in duplicate. Assessment of methodological quality and data extraction will be performed using Joanna Briggs Institute standard forms. Findings from the systematic reviews and their methodological quality will be summarised qualitatively in the text and using tables.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. Results of this umbrella review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and summarised in the Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health.Trial registration numberThis protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework Registries (https://osf.io/qhv9g/).

Project description:BackgroundSickle cell disease (SCD) and thalassemia are inherited blood disorders, which can lead to life-threatening events and chronic organ damage. Recent advances in treatments have increased life expectancy, and hemoglobinopathies have become chronic illnesses with social and emotional impairments. Thus, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessment has a fundamental role in disease management and treatment, and generic and disease-specific questionnaires are reliable and validated measures to estimate disease burden. The heterogeneous distribution of treatment opportunities worldwide influences physical, social, and emotional disease perception.ObjectivesTo review publications concerning HRQOL for SCD and thalassemia in different areas of the world in order to gather a global perspective of questionnaires used and outcomes evaluated.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The Medline databases were searched on 29 September 2021. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) studies of HRQOL assessment in SCD and thalassemia patients by using the PROMIS, the SF-36, the SCSES, the PedsQL-SCD, the PedsQOL generic core scale, the ASCQ-Me, and the TranQoL; and (2) every article type, including non-English studies. We excluded studies that were not limited to SCD or thalassemia and studies that were not specific to hemoglobinopathies, and not consistent with the topic of HRQOL assessment. We did not include the gray literature. A total of 102 out of 124 articles from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were eligible for inclusion (66 SCD articles and 36 thalassemia articles). The quality of studies was assessed through Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews. Data extraction was conducted using a standardized data collection form (authors, year and country of publication, study design, age and number of patients, HRQOL questionnaires, questionnaire language, and clinical outcomes).ResultsThe evaluation of HRQOL was conducted on all continents, but differences in the worldwide frequency of HRQOL assessment were observed. HRQOL of SCD patients was less investigated in Europe. HRQOL of thalassemia patients was less investigated in South-East Asia and Africa. Generic HRQOL questionnaires (PROMIS, SF-36, and PedsQL) were frequently adopted, while disease-specific ones (ASCQ-Me, SCSES for SCD, and TranQoL for thalassemia) were less used. Translation into local languages has been often performed.ConclusionHealth-related quality of life is a complex outcome that has been increasingly incorporated in clinical research and clinical practice worldwide, although with regional differences. Disease-specific outcomes (pain for SCD and transfusion burden for thalassemia) and healthcare system characteristics, particularly in low-income countries, have an impact on HRQOL and should be considered in healthcare plans.

Project description:To identify, critically appraise and summarise existing systematic reviews on the impact of global cardiovascular risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adults.Systematic review of systematic reviews published between January 2005 and October 2016 in The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE or CINAHL databases, and post hoc analysis of primary trials.Systematic reviews of interventions involving global cardiovascular risk assessment relative to no formal risk assessment in adults with no history of CVD. The primary outcomes of interest were CVD-related morbidity and mortality and all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), cholesterol and smoking.We identified six systematic reviews of variable but generally of low quality (mean Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 4.2/11, range 0/11 to 7/11). No studies identified by the systematic reviews reported CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality. Meta-analysis of reported randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed small reductions in SBP (mean difference (MD) -2.22?mm?Hg (95% CI -3.49 to -0.95); I2=66%; n=9; GRADE: very low), total cholesterol (MD -0.11?mmol/L (95% CI -0.20 to -0.02); I2=72%; n=5; GRADE: very low), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -0.15?mmol/L (95% CI -0.26 to -0.05), I2=47%; n=4; GRADE: very low) and smoking cessation (RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.43); I2=17%; n=7; GRADE: low). The median follow-up time of reported RCTs was 12?months (range 2-36?months).The quality of existing systematic reviews was generally poor and there is currently no evidence reported in these reviews that the prospective use of global cardiovascular risk assessment translates to reductions in CVD morbidity or mortality. There are reductions in SBP, cholesterol and smoking but they may not be clinically significant given their small effect size and short duration. Resources need to be directed to conduct high-quality systematic reviews focusing on hard patient outcomes, and likely further primary RCTs.CRD42015019821.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a prevalent form of chronic joint disease associated with functional restrictions and pain. Activity limitations negatively impact social connectedness and psychological well-being, reducing the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing information on QoL in KOA patients and share the reported individual factors, which may influence it. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review examining the literature up to JAN/2017 available at MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PsycINFO using KOA and QOL related keywords. Inclusion criteria were QOL compared to at least one demographic factor (e.g., age, gender), lifestyle factor (e.g., functional independence), or comorbidity factor (e.g., diabetes, obesity) and a control group. Analytical methods were not considered as part of the original design. RESULTS:A total of 610 articles were reviewed, of which 62 met inclusion criteria. Instruments used to measure QoL included: SF-36, EQ-5D, KOOS, WHOQOL, HAS, AIMS, NHP and JKOM. All studies reported worse QoL in KOA patients when compared to a control group. When females were compared to males, females reported worse QOL. Obesity as well as lower level of physical activity were reported with lower QoL scores. Knee self-management programs delivered by healthcare professionals improved QoL in patients with KOA. Educational level and higher total mindfulness were reported to improve QoL whereas poverty, psychological distress, depression and lacking familial relationships reduce it. Surgical KOA interventions resulted in good to excellent outcomes generally; although, results varied by age, weight, and depression. CONCLUSION:KOA has a substantial impact on QoL. In KOA patients, QoL is also influenced by specific individual factors including gender, body weight, physical activity, mental health, and education. Importantly, education and management programs designed to support KOA patients report improved QoL. QoL data is a valuable tool providing health care professionals with a better comprehension of KOA disease to aid implementation of the most effective management plan.

Project description:BackgroundMany systematic reviews (SRs) have been published about the various treatments for distal radius fractures (DRF). The heterogeneity of SRs results may come from the misuse of SR methods, and literature overviews have demonstrated that SRs should be considered with caution as they may not always be synonymous with high-quality standards. Our objective is to evaluate the quality of published SRs on the treatment of DRF through these tools.MethodsThe methods utilized in this review were previously published in the PROSPERO database. We considered SRs of surgical and nonsurgical interventions for acute DRF in adults. A comprehensive search strategy was performed in the MEDLINE database (inception to May 2017) and we manually searched the grey literature for non-indexed research. Data were independently extracted by two authors. We assessed SR internal validity and reporting using AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes). Scores were calculated as the sum of reported items. We also extracted article characteristics and provided Spearman's correlation measurements.ResultsForty-one articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The mean score for PRISMA was 15.90 (CI 95%, 13.9-17.89) and AMSTAR was 6.48 (CI 95% 5.72-7.23). SRs that considered only RCTs had better AMSTAR [7.56 (2.1) vs. 5.62 (2.3); p = 0.014] and PRISMA scores [18.61 (5.22) vs. 13.93 (6.47), p = 0.027]. The presence of meta-analysis on the SRs altered PRISMA scores [19.17 (4.75) vs. 10.21 (4.51), p = 0.001] and AMSTAR scores [7.68 (1.9) vs. 4.39 (1.66), p = 0.001]. Journal impact factor or declaration of conflict of interest did not change PRISMA and AMSTAR scores. We found substantial inter observer agreement for PRISMA (0.82, 95% CI 0.62-0.94; p = 0.01) and AMSTAR (0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; p = 0.01), and moderate correlation between PRISMA and AMSTAR scores (0.83, 95% CI 0.62-0.92; p = 0.01).ConclusionsDRF RCT-only SRs have better PRISMA and AMSTAR scores. These tools have substantial inter-observer agreement and moderate inter-tool correlation. We exposed the current research panorama and pointed out some factors that can contribute to improvements on the topic.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Over two million people in the UK are living with and beyond cancer. A third report diminished quality of life. DESIGN:A review of published systematic reviews to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions to improve the quality of life of cancer survivors. DATA SOURCES:Databases searched until May 2017 included PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. STUDY SELECTION:Published systematic reviews of randomised trials of non-pharmacological interventions for people living with and beyond cancer were included; included reviews targeted patients aged over 18. All participants had already received a cancer diagnosis. Interventions located in any healthcare setting, home or online were included. Reviews of alternative therapies or those non-English reports were excluded. Two researchers independently assessed titles, abstracts and the full text of papers, and independently extracted the data. OUTCOMES:The primary outcome of interest was any measure of global (overall) quality of life. ANALYTICAL METHODS:Quality assessment assessing methdological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and narrative synthesis, evaluating effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions and their components. RESULTS:Of 14?430 unique titles, 21 were included in the review of reviews. There was little overlap in the primary papers across these reviews. Thirteen reviews covered mixed tumour groups, seven focused on breast cancer and one focused on prostate cancer. Face-to-face interventions were often combined with online, telephone and paper-based reading materials. Interventions included physical, psychological or behavioural, multidimensional rehabilitation and online approaches. Yoga specifically, physical exercise more generally, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) programmes showed benefit in terms of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS:Exercise-based interventions were effective in the short (less than 3-8 months) and long term. CBT and MBSR also showed benefits, especially in the short term. The evidence for multidisciplinary, online and educational interventions was equivocal.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In the long term, smoking cessation can decrease the risk of cancer, stroke, and heart attacks and improve overall survival. The aim of the proposed umbrella review is to summarize existing systematic reviews that assessed the effects of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation and to evaluate the methodological quality of previously conducted systematic reviews. METHODS:Databases such as the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHIL PsychINFO Web of Science, Conference Papers Index, Scopus, and Google Scholar will be used to retrieve reviews. Systematic reviews which included only randomized control trials will be considered in this review. The primary outcome will be prolonged abstinence from smoking for a minimum of 6 months follow-up, and the secondary outcome will be point abstinence rate from smoking of less than 6 months follow-up but more than 7?days. Methodological quality of the included reviews will be assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) tool, which contains 16 domains. Two authors will screen the titles and abstracts of all reviews obtained by the search strategy, assess the full text of selected articles for inclusion, and extract data independently. The quality appraisal will be also assessed by two authors (AM, CC) independently, and Cohen's Kappa statistic will be used to assess inter-ratter agreement. The findings of the study will be narrated qualitatively to describe the effect of different pharmacotherapy on smoking cessation. DISCUSSION:The World Health Organization recommends treatment of tobacco dependence as one approach in its comprehensive tobacco control policy. To date, many trials and systematic reviews have been conducted to assess the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. Therefore, the findings of the umbrella review will improve clinical decision-making and be used as a baseline for future studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42017080906.