Abstract
For the diagnosis of dry eye, global criteria are required that recognize a commonality among all forms of dry eye, even though they do not necessarily identify a particular etiology.1 A dry eye questionnaire2 can serve as a screening instrument with clinic populations and has been shown to be capable of delivering valid sensitivity and specificity information.3 In dry eye research a questionnaire can be used to define treatment groups according to symptoms.4 The feasibility of dry eye related epidemiological surveys of population-based samples may depend on the use of a self-reporting questionnaire.5 Ideally, classification into dry eye and non-dry eye samples is preferred, but a third group with an equivocal diagnosis is usually present for which the terms questionable6 and marginal7 dry eye have been used. The marginal dry eye classification is appropriate for the common presentation of individuals whose tear function is adequate only in favorable conditions and is otherwise deficient in provocative circumstances of air conditioning, central heating, with use of dehydrating medications, following alcohol consumption, and/or with contact lens wear. This investigation is concerned with how dry eye questionnaire responses should be weighted to achieve optimum classification into dry eye, marginal dry eye, and non-dry eye groups.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Lemp MA. Report of the National Eye Institute/Industry Workshop on Clinical Trials in Dry Eyes. CLAO J. 1995; 21: 221–232.
McMonnies CW. Key questions in a dry eye history. JAm Optom Assoc. 1986; 57: 512–517.
McMonnies CW, Ho A. Patient history in screening for dry eye conditions. J Am Optom Assoc. 1987; 58: 296–301.
Golding TR, Brennan NA. Diagnostic accuracy and inter-correlation of clinical tests for dry eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei. 1993; 34: 823.
Bandeen-Roche K, Schein OD, Munoz B, et al. Challenges to defining and quantifying dry eye. ARVO Abstracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995; 36: S862.
Seal DV, Mackie IA. The questionably dry eye as a clinical and biochemical entity. In: Holly FJ, Lamberts DW, MacKeen DL, eds. The Preocular Tear Film in Health, Disease, and Contact Lens Wear. Lubbock, TX: Dry Eye Institute; 1986: 41–51.
McMonnies CW, Ho A. Marginal dry eye diagnosis: History versus biomicroscopy. In: Holly FJ, Lamberts DW, MacKeen DL, eds. The Preocular Tear Film in Health, Disease, and Contact Lens Wear. Lubbock, TX: Dry Eye Institute; 1986: 32–40.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McMonnies, C., Ho, A., Wakefield, D. (1998). Optimum Dry Eye Classification Using Questionnaire Responses. In: Sullivan, D.A., Dartt, D.A., Meneray, M.A. (eds) Lacrimal Gland, Tear Film, and Dry Eye Syndromes 2. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 438. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5359-5_117
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5359-5_117
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7445-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5359-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive