PURPOSE: To identify preference of treatment regimen in patients with anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in real life. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 200 patients receiving ranibizumab therapy on a pro re nata regimen with monthly controls. One hundred and twenty-four patients were recruited in a tertiary health care clinic, and 76 patients were recruited in a private practice. Patients were asked to respond to a 14-item questionnaire covering items such as treatment burden and preference for treatment: either monthly injections or pro re nata. RESULTS: Mean time under anti-VEGF treatment was 33.7 months, and the mean number of intravitreal injections was 17.7. Despite a high treatment burden in 60.3 % of patients, there was an acceptance rate for monthly examinations or injections of 93 %. The proportion of patients who favoured a PRN regimen was 53.0 %, whereas 37.9 % of patients favoured continuous injections. Major concern was recurrent disease activity in 54.5 %. CONCLUSION: We identified two groups of patients of considerable size who would prefer either monthly injections or as-required. Overall, there was a high acceptance rate despite a high treatment burden. Nevertheless, efforts should be undertaken to improve examination and injection procedures and to consider the patient's preference for a treatment regimen.
PURPOSE: To identify preference of treatment regimen in patients with anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in real life. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 200 patients receiving ranibizumab therapy on a pro re nata regimen with monthly controls. One hundred and twenty-four patients were recruited in a tertiary health care clinic, and 76 patients were recruited in a private practice. Patients were asked to respond to a 14-item questionnaire covering items such as treatment burden and preference for treatment: either monthly injections or pro re nata. RESULTS: Mean time under anti-VEGF treatment was 33.7 months, and the mean number of intravitreal injections was 17.7. Despite a high treatment burden in 60.3 % of patients, there was an acceptance rate for monthly examinations or injections of 93 %. The proportion of patients who favoured a PRN regimen was 53.0 %, whereas 37.9 % of patients favoured continuous injections. Major concern was recurrent disease activity in 54.5 %. CONCLUSION: We identified two groups of patients of considerable size who would prefer either monthly injections or as-required. Overall, there was a high acceptance rate despite a high treatment burden. Nevertheless, efforts should be undertaken to improve examination and injection procedures and to consider the patient's preference for a treatment regimen.
Authors: Daniel F Martin; Maureen G Maguire; Stuart L Fine; Gui-shuang Ying; Glenn J Jaffe; Juan E Grunwald; Cynthia Toth; Maryann Redford; Frederick L Ferris Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Katharina M Droege; Philipp S Muether; Manuel M Hermann; Albert Caramoy; Ulrike Viebahn; Bernd Kirchhof; Sascha Fauser Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-10-20 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Philipp S Muether; Robert Hoerster; Manuel M Hermann; Bernd Kirchhof; Sascha Fauser Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Usha Chakravarthy; Simon P Harding; Chris A Rogers; Susan M Downes; Andrew J Lotery; Sarah Wordsworth; Barnaby C Reeves Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: S Müller; C Ehlken; U Bauer-Steinhusen; W Lechtenfeld; Z Hasanbasic; H Agostini; T Wilke Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2017-08-04 Impact factor: 3.117