Clinical Trials
December 08, 2008

Surgical Removal vs Observation for Idiopathic or Ocular Histoplasmosis Syndrome–Associated Subfoveal Choroidal NeovascularizationVision Preference Value Scale Findings From the Randomized SST Group H Trial: SST Report No. 17

Submacular Surgery Trials Research Group*z
Author Affiliations

*Submacular Surgery Trials Research Group Authors:Members of the SST Patient-Centered Outcomes Subcommittee served as representatives of the SST Research Group on the Writing Committee for this report and include Eric B. Bass MD, MPH ; Marta M. Gilson PhD ; Carol M. Mangione MD, MSPH ; Barbara S. Hawkins PhD ; Päivi H. Miskala PhD ; Ashley L. Mann MS ; and Neil M. Bressler MD . Documentation of approval of the manuscript submitted for publication by the members of the SST Research Group is on file at the SST Coordinating Center in Baltimore. A list of the members of the SST Research Group who contributed data for this report appears in Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(11):1609-1610.




Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.2008

Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(12):1626-1632. doi:10.1001/archopht.126.12.1626

Objective  To determine whether patients receiving observation vs surgery for subfoveal choroidal neovascularization that was idiopathic or associated with histoplasmosis differed in preference values assigned to their health and vision status.

Methods  Before and after enrollment, patients rated their current vision on a scale from 0 (blind) to 100 (perfect vision) and rated blindness and perfect vision on a scale from 0 (dead) to 100 (perfect health and vision). Scores for current vision were converted to a preference value scale (0 represents death; 100, perfect health and vision).

Results  In 170 patients, no significant difference existed between the observation and surgery arms in median vision preference values at baseline (74 vs 70) or at the 12- (74 vs 78) or 24-month follow-up (77 vs 73) (P > .05). Preference values did not differ between arms for subgroups defined by age, unilateral vs bilateral choroidal neovascularization, or good vs poor baseline visual acuity.

Conclusions  Submacular surgery was no better than observation in the preference values patients assigned to their health status, despite previously reported improvements in vision-specific quality of life.

Trial Registration Identifier: NCT00000150

Clinical Relevance  Ophthalmologists should consider the effects on different measures of quality of life when determining treatment for patients similar to those in the Submacular Surgery Trials Group H Trial.