ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology
Patient Satisfaction of Intravitreal Bevacizumab Injection Services at a Referral Center.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy worldwide and its associated factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Science in One Health · 2023Review
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 evaluate the patient satisfaction of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection services for ocular complications of diabetes mellitus (DM) at a referral center.
methodsPatients with diabetic macular edema (DME) and diabetic retinopathy (DR) who had undergone IVB injections between March and September 2018 were interviewed by telephone using two questionnaires. First, demographic information, medical history, and the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (PSQ-18) 5-point scale were collected. Then, the Retinopathy Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (RetTSQ) 7-point scale was completed. Total scores are presented on a 100-point scale, with 100 indicating complete satisfaction.
resultsTwo hundred and fifty patients (145 with DME and 105 with DR) were interviewed (mean age: 61 ± 10 years; male-to-female ratio: 1:1.5). The response rate was 96%. Twenty-one patients had only one injection. Two hundred and forty-eight (99.2%) patients had insurance. The mean number of total injections was 12.2 ± 11.5. Seventy (28%), forty-seven (18.8%), sixty-one (24.4%), and seventy-two (28.8%) patients underwent IVB treatment for <6 months, between 7 and 12 months, between 13 and 24 months, and >25 months, respectively. The mean total and overall scores were 90.8 ± 22.5 (completely satisfied) and 88.7 ± 16.6 (completely satisfied) based on PSQ-18 and RetTSQ, respectively. Financial problems and appointment scheduling systems were the highest cases of dissatisfaction.
conclusionThe majority of patients were highly satisfied with IVB injections for the management of ocular complications of DM. The appointment taking procedure, waiting times, out-of-pocket expenses, and access to the hospital should be improved.
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.