RESUMEN
According to the speed-control hypothesis, the rate of force development (RFD) during ballistic contractions is dictated by force amplitude because time to peak force (TPF) remains constant regardless of changes in force amplitude. However, this hypothesis has not been tested at force levels below 20% of an individual's maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). Here, we examined the relationship between the RFD and force amplitude from 2 to 85% MVC and the underlying structure of muscle activity in 18 young adults. Participants exerted ballistic index finger abductions for 50 trials in each of seven randomly assigned force levels (2, 5, 15, 30, 50, 70, and 85% MVC). We quantified TPF, RFD, and various EMG burst characteristics. Contrary to the speed-control hypothesis, we found that TPF was not constant, but significantly varied from 2 to 85% MVC. Specifically, the RFD slope from 2 to 15% MVC was greater than the RFD slope from 30 to 85% MVC. Longer TPF at low force levels was associated with the variability of EMG burst duration, whereas longer TPF with higher force levels was associated with the EMG burst integral. Contrary to the speed-control hypothesis, we found that the regulation of TPF for low and high force levels was different, suggesting that neuronal variability is critical for force levels below 30% MVC and neuronal amplitude for force levels above 30% MVC. These findings present compelling new evidence highlighting the limitations of the speed-control hypothesis underscoring the need for a new theoretical framework.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections play a key role in treating a range of macular diseases. The effectiveness of these therapies is dependent on patients' adherence (the extent to which a patient takes their medicines as per agreed recommendations from the healthcare provider) and persistence (continuation of the treatment for the prescribed duration) to their prescribed treatment regimens. The aim of this systematic review was to demonstrate the need for further investigation into the prevalence of, and factors contributing to, patient-led non-adherence and non-persistence, thus facilitating improved clinical outcomes. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted in Google Scholar, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. Studies in English conducted before February 2023 that reported the level of, and/or barriers to, non-adherence or non-persistence to intravitreal anti-VEGF ocular disease therapy were included. Duplicate papers, literature reviews, expert opinion articles, case studies, and case series were excluded following screening by two independent authors. RESULTS: Data from a total of 409,215 patients across 52 studies were analysed. Treatment regimens included pro re nata, monthly and treat-and-extend protocols; study durations ranged from 4 months to 8 years. Of the 52 studies, 22 included a breakdown of reasons for patient non-adherence/non-persistence. Patient-led non-adherence varied between 17.5 and 35.0% depending on the definition used. Overall pooled prevalence of patient-led treatment non-persistence was 30.0% (P = 0.000). Reasons for non-adherence/non-persistence included dissatisfaction with treatment results (29.9%), financial burden (19%), older age/comorbidities (15.5%), difficulty booking appointments (8.5%), travel distance/social isolation (7.9%), lack of time (5.8%), satisfaction with the perceived improvement in their condition (4.4%), fear of injection (4.0%), loss of motivation (4.0%), apathy towards eyesight (2.5%), dissatisfaction with facilities 2.3%, and discomfort/pain (0.3%). Three studies found non-adherence rates between 51.6 and 68.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic, in part due to fear of exposure to COVID-19 and difficulties travelling during lockdown. DISCUSSION: Results suggest high levels of patient-led non-adherence/non-persistence to anti-VEGF therapy, mostly due to dissatisfaction with treatment results, a combination of comorbidities, loss of motivation and the burden of travel. This study provides key information on prevalence and factors contributing to non-adherence/non-persistence in anti-VEGF treatment for macular diseases, aiding identification of at-risk individuals to improve real-world visual outcomes. Improvements in the literature can be achieved by establishing uniform definitions and standard timescales for what constitutes non-adherence/non-persistence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020216205.