Citation

Weih LM, Hassell JB, Keeffe J. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002; 43(4): 927-935.

Affiliation

Centre for Eye Research Australia, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. leann@unimelb.edu.au

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

11923230

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the psychometric characteristics of the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) Profile and evaluate its validity and reliability over time and between different forms of administration. METHODS: The IVI is a 32-item questionnaire developed to measure the impact of vision impairment on restriction of participation in daily activities in five domains of functioning. Each item is rated on a six-level scale from "no difficulty" to "can't do because of vision." The IVI was administered by trained interviewers to 115 people with impaired vision (visual acuity less than 6/12 or visual field deficit) who attended the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, a vision rehabilitation agency, or a self-help group for people with impaired vision. Data were also collected on demographic characteristics of participants, cause of vision impairment, and distance and near vision. General health status was assessed with the Short Form-12 (SF-12) of the Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales. A subset of participants completed the IVI twice, either 1 to 2 weeks apart or by different forms of administration (different interviewers or self). RESULTS: Internal consistency of total and domain average IVI scores was high (alpha = 0.80-0.96) and sequential elimination of items did not affect consistency. Total and domain average IVI scores correlated moderately with both near and distance vision (r = 0.21-0.31) but did not correlate with physical or general health or comorbidity. Total and domain average IVI scores correlated most closely with global measures of restriction of participation (r = 0.44-0.82). Principal-components analysis confirmed that all IVI items contribute to one underlying theme and tended to confirm two of the five domains: emotional reaction to vision loss and mobility. The first three components explained 43%, 8%, and 6% of the variation in the data. Guttman split-half reliability coefficients between different forms of administration and over time ranged from 0.73 to 0.94 for domain and total IVI scores. Mean absolute difference for domain and total scores between administrations was less than 1 step for all domains and the total score. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support that the IVI has sufficient internal and construct validity to measure the effect of vision impairment on restriction of participation in daily activities. The IVI demonstrates acceptable reliability over a short period and yields consistent results between interviewers. The IVI can also be self-administered with assurance that the results will be comparable to those that would have been obtained by a trained interviewer. Therefore, the psychometric characteristics of the IVI support its use in assessment of the vision rehabilitation needs of people with impaired vision. Its stability over time indicates that it has potential to evaluate outcomes of intervention.