Table 5.
Linear Regression Analysis to Examine the Relationship Between Quality of Life Scores and the Best Corrected Visual Acuity at Each Time-Point During Follow-up
| Time Point | Macula-ON | Macula-OFF | |
| CS | Preop | R2 = 0.08; P = 1 | R2 = 0.12; P = 1 |
| M1 | R2 = 0.06; P = 1 | R2 = 0.25; P = 0.35 | |
| M3 | R2 = 0.12; P = 1 | R2 = 0.55; P < 0.001 | |
| SFVFS | Preop | R2 = 0.07; P = 1 | R2 = 0.03; P = 1 |
| M1 | R2 = 0.02; P = 1 | R2 = 0.16; P = 1 | |
| M3 | R2 = 0.41; P = 0.007 | R2 = 0.39; P = 0.05 | |
| SFSES | Preop | R2 = 0.08; P = 1 | R2 = 0.19; P = 0.82 |
| M1 | R2 = 0.10; P = 1 | R2 = 0.25; P = 0.35 | |
| M3 | R2 = 0.09; P = 1 | R2 = 0.58; P = 0.001 |
Pearson correlation coefficient and corresponding P value.
M1, month one follow-up; M3–M6, 3 to 6 months follow-up; R2, Pearson correlation coefficient value, and corresponding P value, the Bonferroni correction was applied to adjust for the multiple tests performed; CS, composite score; SFVFS, short-form visual functioning scale; SFSES, short-form socioemotional scale.