ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2020
Macula service evaluation and assessing priorities for anti-VEGF treatment in the light of COVID-19.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nonadherence to anti-VEGF intravitreal injections in patients with diabetic macular edema : The names of the authors.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Review
- Reproducibility of Portable OCT and Comparison with Conventional OCT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The COVID-19 Pandemic and Ophthalmic Care: A Qualitative Study of Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (nAMD).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown on the Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2022Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on visual outcomes of diabetic macular edema patients at a tertiary care veterans affairs center.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2022Article
- Management of acute proliferative diabetic retinopathy related complications during the first COVID-19 wave.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- COVID-19 in Ophthalmology. Current Disease Status and Challenges during Clinical Practice.Maedica · 2021Article
- The effect of COVID-19 pandemic on the attendance and clinical outcomes of patients with ophthalmic disease: A mini-review.Metabolism open · 2021Article
- The Impact of COVID-19 on Diabetic Retinopathy Monitoring and Treatment.Current diabetes reports · 2021Review
- The impact of delayed anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for retinal diseases during the COVID-19 lockdown.Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 2021Article
- Delayed follow-up of medical retina patients due to COVID-19: impact on disease activity and visual acuity.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021Article
- Assessment of Patients' Confidence Regarding a New Triage Concept in a Medical Retina Clinic during the First COVID-19 Outbreak.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Treatment of neovascular age related macular degeneration during COVID-19 pandemic: The short term consequences of unintended lapses.European journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the treatment position of all patients who have had an anti-VEGF injection in 2020, prior to the UK lockdown on 23 March. To assess methods of service quality evaluation in setting benchmarks for comparison after the situation stabilized. To consider what proportion could be delayed based on national guidelines and varying vision parameters. Finally, to measure how many patients actually attended.
methodA retrospective analysis of data collected from our electronic medical record was performed. Age, sex, reason for injection, visual acuity (VA) for both treated and untreated eyes and number of injections were recorded. The proportion of patients and eyes with ≥ 70 letters were calculated as an assessment of quality of service provision. The proportion of patients that could be delayed was estimated based on published guidelines and varying the parameters of difference between treated and untreated eyes. Finally, the number of patients who actually attended was recorded.
resultsAbout 3364 eyes (2229 neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), 427 diabetic macular oedema (DMO), 599 retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and 109 other) from 2924 patients were analysed. At the last appointment with injection, 64.4% of patients achieved ≥ 70 letters in their better-seeing eye. Mean VA of the treated eye was 61.5 letters, and 36.9% achieved ≥ 70. The mean number of injections was 16, 90% with aflibercept. Of the patients receiving treatment to one eye, 57.6% was receiving treatment to their worse seeing eye. In 18.2% this eye was > 20 letters worse and in 5.07% > 40 letters worse than the untreated eye. Using Royal College of Ophthalmologists (RCOphth) guidelines, (treat nAMD 8 weekly, delay majority of RVO and DMO) 24.8% would be delayed. From 2738 appointments during the first 4 weeks of lockdown (booked prior to lockdown), doctors rescheduled 1025 and patients did not attend 820, leaving 893 who were seen (33%).
conclusionsAssessing the treatment position of patients prior to COVID-19 lockdown enables objective stratification for prioritization for continued treatment. If RCOphth guidelines were followed 24.8% could be delayed and if treating the worse seeing eye up to 57.6%. Many scheduled patients elected not to attend, with 67% not seen in the first 4 weeks. The impact of non-attendance and delays may be evaluated later.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.