OBJECTIVE: To describe micronutrient usage patterns among patients at a tertiary ophthalmic center. DESIGN: Cross-sectional clinical case series. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred thirty-two adult patients with a diagnosis of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS: Participants were surveyed about micronutrient usage patterns. The treating ophthalmologist recorded AMD severity using the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) classification system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to study questionnaire and level of AMD severity. RESULTS: Among 332 participants, 309 (93%) were using supplements, among which 174 (52%) supplemented with an AREDS-like formulation. Of these 174, 140 (80%) were considered AREDS supplement candidates based on study guidelines. Applying AREDS supplementation guidelines to the full cohort, 228 (69%) were candidates for supplementation. Only 140 (61%) of these individuals were confirmed to be using the correct formulation and dosage; an additional 13 (6%) used the AREDS formulation but were not using the recommended dosage. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving care for AMD at a tertiary retinal center, more than one third of those deemed candidates for AREDS-type supplements were not using them or were using an incorrect dose. Furthermore, nearly one fifth of participants who were using high-dose supplements did not have a level of AMD anticipated to benefit from usage. Increased patient education is needed regarding the recommendations of AREDS.
OBJECTIVE: To describe micronutrient usage patterns among patients at a tertiary ophthalmic center. DESIGN: Cross-sectional clinical case series. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred thirty-two adult patients with a diagnosis of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS:Participants were surveyed about micronutrient usage patterns. The treating ophthalmologist recorded AMD severity using the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) classification system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to study questionnaire and level of AMD severity. RESULTS: Among 332 participants, 309 (93%) were using supplements, among which 174 (52%) supplemented with an AREDS-like formulation. Of these 174, 140 (80%) were considered AREDS supplement candidates based on study guidelines. Applying AREDS supplementation guidelines to the full cohort, 228 (69%) were candidates for supplementation. Only 140 (61%) of these individuals were confirmed to be using the correct formulation and dosage; an additional 13 (6%) used the AREDS formulation but were not using the recommended dosage. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving care for AMD at a tertiary retinal center, more than one third of those deemed candidates for AREDS-type supplements were not using them or were using an incorrect dose. Furthermore, nearly one fifth of participants who were using high-dose supplements did not have a level of AMD anticipated to benefit from usage. Increased patient education is needed regarding the recommendations of AREDS.
Authors: Kam Chun Ho; Fiona Stapleton; Louise Wiles; Peter Hibbert; Sally Alkhawajah; Andrew White; Isabelle Jalbert Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 2.655