Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for Geographic Atrophy: a mixed-methods study

Author:

Enoch Jamie,Ghulakhszian ArevikORCID,Sekhon MandeepORCID,Crabb David P.ORCID,Taylor Deanna J.ORCID,Dinah ChristianaORCID

Abstract

AbstractPurposeThe acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for patients with Geographic Atrophy (GA) is currently unknown. This study therefore aimed to: investigate whether regular intravitreal injections will be acceptable as treatment for GA patients; identify which attributes of current treatments in late stage development patients find less acceptable; and explore whether patient-related factors influence GA treatment acceptability.DesignExploratory, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study.Participants30 UK-based individuals with GA secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), recruited from two London-based hospitals, interviewed in April-October 2021.MethodsParticipants responded to a structured questionnaire, as well as open-ended questions in a semi-structured interview. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric measures of correlation. Qualitative data were analysed using the framework method of analysis, informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.Main outcome measuresMain quantitative measures were Likert-type scale responses about acceptability of GA treatments. Qualitative outcomes of interest related to participants’ hopes, concerns and understanding of the proposed new intravitreal treatments for GA.ResultsTwenty participants (67%) were female, and median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 83 (78, 87) years. 37% of participants had foveal centre-involving GA, and better eye median (IQR) logMAR visual acuity was 0.30 (0.17, 0.58). Data suggested that 18 participants (60% (95% CI: 41-79%)) would accept the treatment if offered today, despite their awareness of potential drawbacks. Eight participants (27% (95% CI: 10-43%) were ambivalent or undecided about treatment, and four (13%) (95% CI: 0-26%) would be unlikely to accept treatment. Reducing the frequency of injections from monthly to every other month increased the proportion of participants who considered the treatments acceptable.Qualitative data indicated that participants’ prioritisation of continuation with vision-specific activities influenced treatment acceptability. Conversely, factors limiting acceptability clustered around: the limited magnitude of treatment efficacy; concerns about side effects or the increased risk of neovascular AMD; and the logistical burden of regular clinic visits for intravitreal injections. Misunderstandings of potential benefits indicate the need for appropriately designed patient education tools to support decision-making.ConclusionsOur study suggests a majority of participants would be positive about intravitreal treatment for GA, in spite of potential burdens.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3