Measuring patient activation: the utility of the Patient Activation Measure administered in an interview setting.

BACKGROUND: Patient activation is an emerging field in healthcare research concerning knowledge, skills, and confidence of patients in managing their health. This is particularly important for patients with chronic diseases, who often require more complex care management and self-care skills. However, due to temporary or longer-lasting visual impairments, certain patient groups cannot answer a questionnaire independently. The main objective is to investigate the psychometric properties of the German Patient Activation Measure® (PAM) survey in an everyday clinical setting where it has to be read aloud. METHODS: Outpatients with macular edema participated in this questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. The study assessed patient activation by the PAM® survey, self-rated health, self-efficacy, quality of life, and general mood. Interviewers read questionnaires aloud to patients. Psychometric properties of the PAM® survey were investigated by item response theory (IRT), Cronbach's α and trait-trait correlations. RESULTS: The analysis included N = 554 patients. Median age was 69 (IQR 62.0-76.0) years and mean overall activation score 74.1 (SD 13.7). All items showed ceiling effects. Empirical reliability from the IRT model and Cronbach's α were 0.75. The PAM® survey showed a Spearman correlation of 0.54 with self-efficacy, 0.51 with quality of life and 0.34 with general mood. CONCLUSION: The read-aloud PAM® survey has been shown to provide to adequate measurement precision and convergent validity to be used as a screening tool in an everyday clinical setting. Objective assessment in an interview setting with the PAM® survey is possible. PAM® items are good in distinguishing lower to middle activated patients, but not patients with high activation. Further, issues with structural validity need more investigation.

Depth of focus after implantation of spherical or aspheric intraocular lenses in hyperopic and emmetropic patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether hyperopic patients with short axial length and high dioptric intraocular lens (IOL) power can achieve a higher depth of focus after implantation of a monofocal spherical or aspheric IOL than emmetropic patients. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: Patients presenting for cataract surgery were divided by calculated IOL power into a hyperopic (≥22.0 diopters [D]) or emmetropic (18.0 to 21.5 D) groups and received an aspheric (Tecnis ZA9003) or a spherical IOL (Sensar AR40e). Postoperative measurements included corrected (CDVA) and uncorrected (UDVA) distance visual acuities, distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA) and near (DCNVA) visual acuities, root-mean-square values of corneal and total eye higher-order aberrations and spherical aberrations, and photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity. RESULTS: Sixty-two eyes of 62 patients were enrolled in this study, 34 eyes (15 hyperopic, 19 emmetropic) in the aspheric IOL group and 28 eyes (14 hyperopic, 14 emmetropic) in the spherical IOL group. The UDVA, CDVA, and contrast sensitivity did not differ significantly between the 2 IOL groups, whereas the DCIVA and DCNVA were significantly better in the spherical IOL group (P = .004 and P = .001, respectively). No significant differences were found in DCIVA and DCNVA between hyperopic patients and emmetropic patients with aspheric or spherical IOLs. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of a monofocal spherical IOL resulted in an increased depth of focus without significant degradation of distance visual acuity or contrast sensitivity. There were no differences in the depth of focus between hyperopic eyes and emmetropic eyes.