A Survey on the Preference of Sustained Glaucoma Drug Delivery Systems by Singaporean Chinese Patients: A Comparison Between Subconjunctival, Intracameral, and Punctal Plug Routes.
Chan Hiok Hong, Wong Tina T, Lamoureux Ecosse, Perera Shamira
AI Summary
Singaporean Chinese glaucoma patients mostly accept sustained drug delivery, preferring punctal plugs. This suggests these systems are viable alternatives to daily drops, especially for males, non-subsidized patients, and those with bilateral glaucoma.
Abstract
Purpose
To investigate the acceptance and preferences rates of 3 sustained drug delivery systems in glaucoma patients.
Materials and methods
A cross-sectional study involving 250 Chinese patients recruited from outpatient glaucoma clinics in Singapore using an interviewer-administered survey. Beliefs toward medicines, eye drops, illness perception, medication adherence, and health literacy were assessed using validated questionnaires. After receiving standard information on the 3 sustained drug delivery systems, that is, subconjunctival, intracameral, and punctal routes; each route's acceptance and attitudes were determined.
Results
The subconjunctival (acceptance: 61.6%, n=154), intracameral (acceptance: 57.2%, n=143), and punctal (acceptance: 63.2%, n=158) routes were willing to be accepted by the majority of the interviewed patients. Among those, 78.6%, 79.1%, and 78.5% were willing to pay an equal or higher cost compared with their current eye drops for the subconjunctival, intracameral, and punctal plug routes, respectively. Independent factors associated with the acceptance for subconjunctival, intracameral, and punctal plug routes included: male sex (P=0.007, 0.014, 0.046, respectively), patients not on health care subsidies (P=0.022, 0.002, 0.016, respectively), and bilateral glaucoma disease (P=0.003, 0.013, 0.004, respectively). A total of 120 (48.0%) patients ranked punctal plug placement as the preferred route for sustained drug delivery followed by subconjunctival (n=76, 30.4%) and intracameral (n=54, 21.6%) routes.
Conclusions
Sustained drug delivery for the medical treatment of glaucoma is an acceptable alternative to daily eye drop administration by most Singaporean Chinese individuals in this study. Male patients, nonsubsidized patients, and those with bilateral glaucoma were independently associated with preference of these 3 alternative routes of administration to traditional glaucoma drops.
MeSH Terms
Shields Classification
Key Concepts5
The subconjunctival route for sustained glaucoma drug delivery was accepted by 61.6% (n=154) of 250 Chinese patients in Singapore.
The intracameral route for sustained glaucoma drug delivery was accepted by 57.2% (n=143) of 250 Chinese patients in Singapore.
The punctal route for sustained glaucoma drug delivery was accepted by 63.2% (n=158) of 250 Chinese patients in Singapore.
Independent factors associated with the acceptance for subconjunctival, intracameral, and punctal plug routes for sustained glaucoma drug delivery included male sex (P=0.007, 0.014, 0.046, respectively), patients not on health care subsidies (P=0.022, 0.002, 0.016, respectively), and bilateral glaucoma disease (P=0.003, 0.013, 0.004, respectively) in a cross-sectional study of 250 Chinese patients in Singapore.
Among 250 Chinese patients in Singapore, 120 (48.0%) ranked punctal plug placement as the preferred route for sustained glaucoma drug delivery, followed by subconjunctival (n=76, 30.4%) and intracameral (n=54, 21.6%) routes.
Related Articles5
Impact of neighborhood-level deprivation on glaucoma prevalence and treatment: A review of the literature.
Systematic ReviewSymptomatic Presbyopia may Develop Earlier in Patients With Glaucoma-A Cross-Sectional Retrospective Cohort Study.
Cross-Sectional StudyPatients' Acceptance of Glaucoma Therapy in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Cross-Sectional StudyLong-Term Effect of Systemic Comorbidity on Glaucoma Medication Adherence.
Cohort StudyThe Effect of Insurance Coverage Laws on Glaucoma Eyedrop Medication Usage.
Observational StudyIs this article assigned to the wrong chapter(s)? Let us know.