Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2025
Factors determining compliance with recommended intravitreal injections for retinal diseases among out-of-pocket, fully subsidized (non-paying), and insured patients: Real-world evidence from India.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Das Anthony V, Kashyap Brijesh, Takkar Brijesh, Venugopal Ragukumar, Chatterjee Chirantan, Mehta Mehul C, Stewart Michael W, Murthy Gudlavalleti V S, Khanna Rohit C, Das Taraprasad, Narayanan Raja
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the factors associated with compliance with recommended intravitreal injections (IVIs) for retinal diseases among out-of-pocket, insured, and fully subsidized (non-paying) patients.
METHODS: This retrospective observational hospital-based study included patients recommended for IVI in at least one eye between November 2011 and May 2022. Three cohorts of patients were assessed: out-of-pocket payers, insured, and those fully subsidized (non-paying) by the hospital. The main outcome measure was the compliance rate, defined as the proportion of patients receiving an injection after one was recommended. The impact on the visual outcome in each cohort was a secondary outcome.
RESULTS: Overall, 50,408 IVI were recommended for at least one eye and were included in the analyses. Male patients were more common (66.72%), and the mean age was 55.36 ± 16.39 years. The overall compliance rate with the first recommended injection was 51.37%, which increased and eventually stabilized with subsequent recommendations to approximately 80% (range: 77.48%-82.93%). Insured patients had a higher compliance rate with the first recommendation compared to the non-insured (100% vs. 49.84%; P < 0.000 01 ), and non-paying patients had a higher compliance rate after the first recommendation compared to paying patients (62.51% vs. 48.66%; P < 0.000 01 ). Patients with insurance achieved a better visual outcome at the last follow-up compared to other cohorts.
CONCLUSION: Insured patients have a much higher compliance rate with recommended IVIs compared to out-of-pocket or non-paying patients. The high non-compliance rate among non-paying patients suggests that factors other than the direct cost of the injections may impact compliance with recommended treatment.
METHODS: This retrospective observational hospital-based study included patients recommended for IVI in at least one eye between November 2011 and May 2022. Three cohorts of patients were assessed: out-of-pocket payers, insured, and those fully subsidized (non-paying) by the hospital. The main outcome measure was the compliance rate, defined as the proportion of patients receiving an injection after one was recommended. The impact on the visual outcome in each cohort was a secondary outcome.
RESULTS: Overall, 50,408 IVI were recommended for at least one eye and were included in the analyses. Male patients were more common (66.72%), and the mean age was 55.36 ± 16.39 years. The overall compliance rate with the first recommended injection was 51.37%, which increased and eventually stabilized with subsequent recommendations to approximately 80% (range: 77.48%-82.93%). Insured patients had a higher compliance rate with the first recommendation compared to the non-insured (100% vs. 49.84%; P < 0.000 01 ), and non-paying patients had a higher compliance rate after the first recommendation compared to paying patients (62.51% vs. 48.66%; P < 0.000 01 ). Patients with insurance achieved a better visual outcome at the last follow-up compared to other cohorts.
CONCLUSION: Insured patients have a much higher compliance rate with recommended IVIs compared to out-of-pocket or non-paying patients. The high non-compliance rate among non-paying patients suggests that factors other than the direct cost of the injections may impact compliance with recommended treatment.