Ocular immunology and inflammation · 2025
Barriers to Adherence with Clinic Visits in Patients with Uveitis.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sun Karen, Marshall Rayna, Frankland Michael, Taylor Amal, Montana Cynthia, Crowell Eric, Armbrust Karen R, Kopplin Laura, Berkenstock Meghan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To assess the patient barriers to adherence with appointment follow-up in patients with ocular inflammatory disorders across the United States.
METHODS: This was a multicenter study of adult and pediatric patients at the Wilmer Eye Institute, University of Texas at Austin, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Veterans Administration Hospital, and Washington University of St. Louis. The primary outcome was self-reported adherence to follow-up visits. Secondary outcomes were the reasons for missing follow-up including sub analyses of patient demographics. Eligible patients completed a self-reporting survey to assess barriers to attending follow-up visits.
RESULTS: The survey was fully completed by 210 subjects and partially by 40 (250 in total), of whom were 67% white, 59% female, and 51% had a college or advanced degree. Most patients had bilateral (68%), anterior (51%) uveitis. Patients were treated with topical corticosteroids (33%), immunosuppressive agents (23%), or both (22%). Most patients (79%) did not miss or cancel appointments. Ninety-seven percent of patients had medical insurance and some paid (39%) more than 40 dollars for their copay. Copay costs limited the number of visits patients could attend in 7% of patients. Eight percent of patients missed appointments due to inability to take off time from work and 5% missed visits due to lack of transportation.
CONCLUSION: Most patients with ocular inflammation reported good adherence to follow-up appointments. Insurance type, copay costs, transportation, patient scheduling, and patient understanding were all minimally reported to effect patient visit attendance.
METHODS: This was a multicenter study of adult and pediatric patients at the Wilmer Eye Institute, University of Texas at Austin, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Veterans Administration Hospital, and Washington University of St. Louis. The primary outcome was self-reported adherence to follow-up visits. Secondary outcomes were the reasons for missing follow-up including sub analyses of patient demographics. Eligible patients completed a self-reporting survey to assess barriers to attending follow-up visits.
RESULTS: The survey was fully completed by 210 subjects and partially by 40 (250 in total), of whom were 67% white, 59% female, and 51% had a college or advanced degree. Most patients had bilateral (68%), anterior (51%) uveitis. Patients were treated with topical corticosteroids (33%), immunosuppressive agents (23%), or both (22%). Most patients (79%) did not miss or cancel appointments. Ninety-seven percent of patients had medical insurance and some paid (39%) more than 40 dollars for their copay. Copay costs limited the number of visits patients could attend in 7% of patients. Eight percent of patients missed appointments due to inability to take off time from work and 5% missed visits due to lack of transportation.
CONCLUSION: Most patients with ocular inflammation reported good adherence to follow-up appointments. Insurance type, copay costs, transportation, patient scheduling, and patient understanding were all minimally reported to effect patient visit attendance.