Observational studyBMC ophthalmology2026
Impact of a structured patient engagement program on treatment adherence, injection persistence, and visual outcomes in real-world anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Observational study in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundNeovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a leading cause of irreversible visual impairment among older adults. Although intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy has improved visual outcomes, real-world effectiveness is often limited by poor adherence and treatment discontinuation. This study evaluated the impact of a structured patient engagement program on treatment adherence, injection persistence, visual outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes in patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy for nAMD.
methodsThis single-center retrospective observational comparative cohort study included 350 patients with nAMD treated between January 2022 and December 2024. Patients received either standard care alone (n = 175) or standard care plus a structured patient engagement program (n = 175) incorporating individualized education, adherence counseling, appointment reminders, and proactive follow-up communication. Primary outcomes were treatment adherence and injection persistence. Secondary outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), patient satisfaction, and disease understanding.
resultsPatients enrolled in the engagement program demonstrated significantly better adherence than those receiving standard care. The mean number of missed injection visits was lower (0.51 ± 0.68 vs. 1.48 ± 1.27; P < 0.001), and delayed injections exceeding two weeks were less frequent (22.3% vs. 50.9%; P < 0.001). Good adherence was achieved in 89.1% of patients in the engagement group compared with 50.3% in the standard care group (P < 0.001), while treatment persistence was higher (90.9% vs. 77.7%; P = 0.001). Final BCVA was significantly better in the engagement group (0.61 ± 0.30 vs. 0.70 ± 0.34 LogMAR; P = 0.015), and a greater proportion of patients experienced visual improvement (65.1% vs. 52.6%; P = 0.023). Patient satisfaction and disease understanding were also significantly higher among patients receiving the engagement intervention (P < 0.001 for both). Safety outcomes were comparable between groups.
conclusionsA structured patient engagement program was associated with improved treatment adherence, enhanced injection persistence, and better short- to mid-term visual outcomes in patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy for nAMD. These findings support the integration of patient-centered engagement strategies into routine retinal care to optimize real-world treatment outcomes.
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.