Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34737546›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Importance of Treatment Duration: Unmasking Barriers and Discovering the Reasons for Undertreatment of Anti-VEGF Agents in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Bianka Sobolewska, Muhammed Sabsabi, Focke Ziemssen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Clinical Effect of Tongmai Fuming Decoction on Neovascular Ophthalmopathy.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Article
  19. Novel therapies for proliferative retinopathies.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2022
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bianka SobolewskaCenter for Ophthalmology, Eberhard- Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8643-6873
Muhammed SabsabiCenter for Ophthalmology, Eberhard- Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany.
Focke ZiemssenUniversity Eye Hospital, Center for Ophthalmology, University of Tübingen, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3873-0581

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSince non-adherence (NA) to intravitreal therapy with VEGF drugs is one of the most important modifiable factors compromising treatment outcome of nAMD, the purpose of this study was to investigate the contributing factors and barriers during long-term nAMD treatment.

methodsBarriers and potential reasons for NA were prospectively measured using the Adherence Barriers Questionnaire Intravitreal Therapy (ABQ-IVT). A random sample of patients receiving intravitreal therapy was drawn based on data for different treatment periods. Three age-sex matched groups included the treatment periods of ≤30 months (group 1), between >30 months and ≤60 months (group 2), and >60 months (group 3). The occurrence of gaps between treatments and/or OCT visits was evaluated.

resultsNA with gaps of >56 days after the scheduled appointment was detected in 39%, 89%, and 100% of patients in group 1, 2, and 3, respectively (groups 1 and 2 vs group 3, p < 0.001). Two or more of such gaps were observed in 6%, 72%, and 94% of patients in group 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The overall ABQ-IVT score showed corresponding differences between the groups: 25.89 ± 7.68 (group 1, 95% CI 22.07-29.71), 34.72 ± 10.32 (group 2, 95% CI: 29.59-38.86), and 33.28 ± 9.04 (group 3, 95% CI 28.78-37.77). Accordingly, the score was inversely correlated with the number of regular follow-up visits in groups 2 and 3 (Pearson correlation coefficient r = -0.65 (p = 0.003) and r = -0.5 (p = 0.034), respectively). Within the groups of longer treatment duration, univariate logistic regression analysis showed higher odds of time commitment and challenge accompanying person to be relevant barriers.

conclusionNA is an arising problem with increasing duration of intravitreal therapy. Treatment barriers, detected by the ABQ-IVT, might change or increase during the course of the treatment.

Indexed as

ABQ-IVTage-related macular degenerationanti-VEGFnon-adherencetreatment barriers

Identifiers

PMID34737546
PMCPMC8558036

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.