User Friendliness and Perioperative Guidance Benefits of a Cataract Surgery Education App: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgeries are among the most performed surgeries worldwide. A thorough patient education is essential to inform patients about the perioperative process and postoperative target results concerning the intraocular lens and objectives for visual outcomes. However, addressing all relevant aspects and questions is time-consuming. Mobile apps can facilitate this process for both patients and physicians and thus be beneficial. However, the success of such an app depends on its user friendliness and acceptance by patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the user friendliness and acceptance of a cataract surgery education app on mobile devices among patients undergoing cataract surgery, the characteristics of patients who benefit the most from app use, and the influence of the app on patient satisfaction with treatment. METHODS: All patients who underwent cataract surgery at an ophthalmological practice from August 2020 to July 2021 were invited to participate in this randomized controlled trial. Out of 493 invited patients, 297 (60.2%) were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized into 3 different groups. Half of the patients were offered to participate in Group 1 with use of the "Patient Journey" app. However, if they decided not to use the app, they were included in Group 2 (app denial). The other half of the patients were included in Group 3 (control) with no use of the app and with information provided conventionally. The app provided general information on the ophthalmological center, surgeons, cataract, and treatment options. Different questionnaires were used in all 3 groups to evaluate satisfaction with the perioperative process. Group 1 evaluated the app. Demographic characteristics, such as age, gender, and educational degree, were assessed. RESULTS: Group 1 included 77 patients (median age 69 years). Group 2 included 61 patients, and their median age was higher (median age 79 years). Group 3 included 159 patients (median age 74 years). There was no difference in satisfaction with the perioperative process and clinic between the 3 groups. Almost all app users appreciated the digital details provided for the organization and the information on the surgery. Age did not play a major role in appreciation of the app. Female patients tended to appreciate the information provided more than male patients. Patients who did not have a higher university degree experienced more benefits from the informational content of the app and were the most satisfied with the information. However, male patients and academics were in general more aware of technology and handled the app more easily. CONCLUSIONS: The app showed high user friendliness and acceptance, and could particularly benefit specific patient groups. App users demonstrated a noninferior high satisfaction with the treatment in the ophthalmological center in comparison with patients who were informed about the surgery only conventionally.

Gender-related differences in patients treated with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medication for diabetic macular oedema.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes prevalence is constantly rising, involving the eyes with damage including development of diabetic macular oedema. Since 2012, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medication is available for diabetic macular oedema treatment. Endocrinological studies have shown that fewer women are affected by diabetes. However, when affected, they exhibit more severe diabetic complications than men. We have investigated gender-related differences in diabetic macular oedema and outcome in an ophthalmological tertiary referral hospital. METHODS: We included 88 patients (54 males and 34 females) with 112 eyes (68 male and 44 female) having clinically significant diabetic macular oedema, treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medication. A 1 year follow-up was performed in all patients (visual acuity and optical coherence tomography). Previous retinal surgery was an exclusion criterion, as were other retinal pathologies. RESULTS: The mean visual acuity and mean central retinal thickness at baseline were 0.53 logMAR (male 0.49 and female 0.595) and 469 µm (male 452 µm and female: 494 µm), respectively. After 360 days, mean visual acuity changed by -0.07 (±0.36) logMAR (male -0.11 and female +0.01) and mean central retinal thickness changed by -119 µm (male -113 µm and female -127 µm). For visual acuity, a significant difference was noted at baseline (p = 0.02) and at 1 year (p < 0.001). Males received 5.6 injections and females received 5.68 injections in 1 year. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that female patients with diabetic macular oedema were diagnosed with and treated for diabetic macular oedema at a stage when visual acuity and optical coherence tomography were worse than those in their male counterparts. This gender difference could not be reduced, despite similar numbers of injections. Female diabetic patients should therefore be assessed early for ophthalmological pathologies.

COMPLIANCE AND ADHERENCE OF PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA TO INTRAVITREAL ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR THERAPY IN DAILY PRACTICE.

PURPOSE: We assessed differences in compliance and adherence (lateness of patients, visual acuity, reasons for abstaining) between patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) and patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD), both under anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. METHODS: We included 136 patients with DME (36% women, 65 years, 22 visits, 13.9 injections, and 29.9 months of follow-up) and 109 patients with AMD (59% women, 76 years, 20 visits, 14.7 injections, and 22.3 months of follow-up) (minimum follow-up of 12 months and at least 5 injections). We assessed missed appointments (lateness >14 days) and therapy break-offs (lateness >100 days). All delayed patients were called and interviewed for abstaining reasons. RESULTS: Forty-six percent of patients with DME and 22% of patients with AMD had at least one break-off. Thirty-five percent of patients with DME and 50% of patients with AMD were always on schedule. In patients with DME, there was significant correlation (P = 0.017) between the number of break-offs and change of visual acuity. In 60% DME and 38% AMD of break-off cases, visual acuity was worse than the before break-off. The most common reason for abstaining was comorbidities (33% AMD and 20% DME). CONCLUSION: There are significant differences between patients with AMD and DME regarding compliance and adherence, which also affects outcome. Strategies to tie patients with DME to costly intravitreal therapy need to be developed to improve outcomes and efficacy.