RESUMO
Background Glaucoma in adults is a leading eye disease that causes blindness. Its management is life long and both surgical and medical treatment options are available to manage this ailment. Patients and their caregiver's cooperation in instilling timely eye drops is crucial for the effective reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) and by halting/delaying the progression of visual disabilities due to glaucoma. Periodic assessment and strict adherence to medical treatment has been found to be less than desired. It is influenced by the severity of the disease, the duration of the ailment, the number of eye drops being used, the literacy level, and the cost of medication. We present the adherence rate of topical medications and its determinants among adult Saudi glaucoma patients getting treated in 2017 in a tertiary eye center in Saudi Arabia. Methodology This cross-sectional survey was carried out from January to March 2017 at a tertiary eye hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. To undertake a cross-sectional study, we assumed that among 1300 patients visiting the eye department of a tertiary eye hospital, the level of non-adherence to glaucoma medication would be in 27% of glaucoma patients. To achieve a 95% confidence interval and an acceptable error margin of 5% for a survey, we needed to interview at least 253 participants. Results We interviewed 263 randomly selected glaucoma patients among 1236 patients visiting the eye department of the tertiary eye hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Two-thirds of participants were school graduates, Saudi nationals, and had undergone surgery for glaucoma in the past; perhaps only YAG laser peripheral iridotomy (PI). Less than half of the participants (43%) had less than a one-year duration of glaucoma. The client-perceived subjective adherence rate to glaucoma medication was noted in 191/263 = 72.6% (95% Confidence Interval 67.2 -78.0). Of the 263 glaucoma patients, 229 judiciously abided with their follow-up appointments with ophthalmologists. Thus, the compliance to follow-up for glaucoma treatment was 87.1% (95% CI 83.0 - 91.1). Conclusion Our study with a large sample is perhaps the first one to assess compliance with medical treatment among adult Saudi glaucoma patients. The adherence rate for topical glaucoma medication measured using the subjective method was 72% among adult glaucoma patients. Adherence with the follow-up appointment with the glaucoma specialist was as high as 87%. Adherence with medical treatment found in the present study versus the literature review suggested that despite different sets of barriers, the adherence rate in Saudi adult glaucoma patients noted in our study was high. Knowledge, beliefs, and attitude are known to affect the adherence rate. In our study, education level and relatives having glaucoma were not associated with the adherence rate. This indirectly suggests that knowledge about the use of medication in the treatment of glaucoma that is gained by patients had a limited influence on adherence in our glaucoma patients. Modes of dispersing knowledge to elderly glaucoma patients and their impact on the adherence rates of medications for glaucoma management need to be further studied.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To present the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) for glaucoma management and their determinants among adult Saudi patients. METHODS: The study was conducted between January and June 2017. Glaucoma patients from the ophthalmology clinic were interviewed. Demographics and disease-related information were noted. The questionnaire included four K questions, seven A questions, and six P squestions. The correct response of questions were summed for K, A, and P, and the percentile was calculated. K and P scores were graded as excellent (more than >75%), good (51%-75%), poor (26%-50%), and very poor (≤25%). If A score was >50%, it was termed as positive. RESULTS: We interviewed 263 adult glaucoma patients. Their mean age was 61.6 ± 14.2 years. The excellent grade of knowledge about glaucoma and its management was 63 (24% [95% confidence interval (CI) 18.8-29.1]). Poor grade of knowledge was 95 (36.1% [95% CI 30.3-41.9]). The attitude toward glaucoma and its management was positive in 89 (33.8% [95% CI 28.1-39.6]). The practice to manage glaucoma was of excellent grade in 10 (3.8% [95% CI 1.5-6.1]). The overall excellent grade of KAP glaucoma patients was 17.9% (13.2-22.5). Good practice for glaucoma management was associated with a history of glaucoma surgery (P < 0.001), longer duration of glaucoma (P = 0.02), and young age (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Low KAP about glaucoma disease and medication among Saudi glaucoma patients is a matter of concern. Strategies are needed to improve the KAP of glaucoma patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The levels of knowledge, attitude and practice among primary physicians concerning both diabetic retinopathy screening and treatment of sight threatening diabetic retinopathy have been studied by different groups, such as medical students, pharmacists, Primary Health Care staff and opticians. In some studies, the levels were very high, while in others it was noted to be less than desired. AIM: This study's intent is to estimate and improve level of Knowledge (K), Attitude (A) and Practice (P) among non-ophthalmic health care providers regarding eye management of diabetes and barriers that people with diabetes face in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey targeted medical doctors (except ophthalmologists) working at private sector institutions in Riyadh. They were interviewed using closed-ended questions for knowledge (8), attitude (5), practice (5), and reasons for their current KAP status comprised of 8 questions. The level of Knowledge was assessed as good if its score was (> 50%); positive attitude (> 50%) and excellent practice (> 75%) were estimated and associated to the risk factors. RESULTS: Out of the 355 participants that were interviewed, the percentages of good knowledge, positive attitude and excellent practice concerning diabetic retinopathy (DR)were 193 [54.3% (95% CI 49.2-59.5)], 111 [31.3% (95% CI 26.4-36.1)], and 145 [40.8% (95% CI 35.7-46.0) participants, respectively. Gender, place of work and type of doctor were not significantly associated with the level of KAP. Salient reasons for low KAP status included a busy schedule (54.6%), less resources (75.2%), inadequate periodic training in eye care (69%), and absence of retinal evaluation training (49.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Improving KAP level is urgently needed. Addressing underlying causes of low KAP could enhance eye care of people with diabetes. Additionally, training for primary health care providers for early detection of DR and timely management of sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) is necessary.