Psychometric Validation of the ViSIO-PRO and ViSIO-ObsRO in Retinitis Pigmentosa and Leber Congenital Amaurosis.

Introduction: Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP) and Leber Congenital Amaurosis (LCA) are rare inherited retinal degenerative disorders. The Visual Symptom and Impact Outcomes patient-reported outcome (ViSIO-PRO) and observer-reported outcome (ViSIO-ObsRO) instruments were developed in this population to assess visual function symptoms and impacts on vision-dependent activities of daily living (ADL) and distal health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the ViSIO-PRO and ViSIO-ObsRO in RP/LCA.

Methods: The 49-item ViSIO-PRO and 27-item ViSIO-ObsRO instruments were completed by 83 adult and adolescent patients and 22 caregivers of child patients aged 3-11 years with RP/LCA, respectively, at baseline and 12-16-day follow-up. Concurrent measures were also administered at baseline. Psychometric analyses assessed item (question) properties, dimensionality, scoring, reliability, validity, and score interpretation.

Results: Item responses were mainly evenly distributed across the response scale, and inter-item correlations were mostly moderate to strong (> 0.30) at baseline within hypothesized domains. Item deletion was informed by item properties, qualitative data, and clinical input and supported retention of 35 ViSIO-PRO items and 25 ViSIO-ObsRO items. Confirmatory factor analysis in line with pre-hypothesized domains supported a four-factor model assessing visual function symptoms, mobility, vision-dependent ADL, and distal HRQoL. A bifactor model supported calculation of total scores and four domain scores. Internal consistency was high for domain and total scores (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70) and test-retest reliability for total scores was strong between baseline and 12-16-day follow-up (intraclass correlation coefficients 0.66-0.98). Convergent validity was supported by strong correlations in a logical pattern with concurrent measures. Mean baseline scores differed significantly between severity groups. Distribution-based methods provided initial insights to guide interpretation of scores.

Conclusions: Findings supported item reduction and established scoring of the instruments. Evidence of reliability and validity as outcome measures in RP/LCA was also reported. Further research is ongoing to explore responsiveness of the ViSIO-PRO and ViSIO-ObsRO instruments and interpretation of change scores.