ArticleBMJ open2023
Pain related to intravitreal injections for age-related macular degeneration: a qualitative study of the perspectives of patients and practitioners.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Article
- Anticipated and Actual Pain Intensity in Patients Receiving Intravitreal Injections: A Cross Sectional Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Characterizing and assessing vision-related quality of life among patients discontinued treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Preliminary Observations of Bilateral Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Progression: A Real-World Retrospective Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Agents Versus Corticosteroids in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Comparative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Patient Experiences of Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injections for Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Studies.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Review
- The relationship between pain intensity and anxiety, injection speed, and intraocular pressure changes during intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injection: the observational pilot study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Qualitative Factors Impacting Patients and Clinicians Regarding Intravitreal Injections for Retinal Disorders: A Scoping Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Article
- Investigating Flow-Induced Corrosion of Magnesium in Ophthalmological Milieu.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOcular pain is a commonly reported finding in the intravitreal injection procedure, but post-injection experiences and patient adherence to treatment remain underexplored. We therefore aimed to identify key variations in the intravitreal injection procedure that may influence pain, and to gain insights into the post-injection experience and treatment adherence from the perspective of patients and practitioners.
designQualitative semistructured interview study using reflexive thematic analysis of transcripts.
settingHospital Eye Clinic in Wales, UK. Interviews were conducted between May and September 2019.
participantsPurposive sample of patients aged ≥50 years with neovascular age-related macular degeneration and no other retinal pathology who had received at least six intravitreal injections, and practitioners including ophthalmologists, registered nurses and optometrists who performed intravitreal injections at the research site.
resultsData saturation was reached with 21 interviews: 14 patients and 7 practitioners. Three main themes were identified from the analysis: fear of losing eyesight and treatment anxiety influence patient adherence to treatment, variability in pain experience during treatment, and post-injection experience and impact on patient recovery. To reassure patients feeling apprehensive about the injections, practitioners promoted safety and trust, and used techniques to manage anxiety. Key variations that may influence pain identified were application of antiseptic or anaesthetic, injecting methods and communication. During injection, patients reported a dull-aching and sharp pain, contrary to practitioners' perspective of feeling a 'pressure'. Patients described prolonged soreness and irritation of up to 36 hours post-injection affecting their sleep and recovery.
conclusionEstablishing rapport supported patients to recognise the necessity of ongoing treatment to prevent sight loss; however, inadequate pain management led to undesirable outcomes. Practitioners should use pain assessment tools during and immediately after injection and provide ongoing consistent information to help patients manage pain at home.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.