Skip to main content

Table 4 Description of identified patient clusters in terms of patient characteristics and answers to interview questions

From: Questionnaire for the assessment of adherence barriers of intravitreal therapy: the ABQ-IVT

Cluster (size)

Cluster 1 (n = 72, 30.7%)

Cluster 2 (n = 25, 10.7%)

Cluster 3 (n = 65, 27.8%)

Cluster 4 (n = 28, 12.0%)

Cluster 5 (n = 24, 10.3%)

Cluster 6 (n = 20, 8.5%)

Overall (n = 234)

Short description of identified clusters

“Difficulties with arranging the appointments themselves”

“Depression/Worried about being a burden for the family”

“No significant barriers to be addressed”

“Lack of belief in the need for therapy”

“Financial burden”

"Several different barriers to be addressed “

Mean (SD)

ABQ score

24.21 (SD: 4.65)***

24.08 (SD: 5.84)*

16.46 (SD: 2.95)***

19.00 (SD: 2.96)*

22.33 (SD: 4.34)

37.05 (SD: 4.9)***

22.32 (SD: 6.95)

Age [years]

71.13 (SD: 13.26)

72.4 (SD: 13.73)

72.4 (SD: 11.09)

76.39 (SD: 9.87)

78.67 (SD: 8.84)**

74.35 (SD: 9.36)

73.29 (SD: 11.79)

Time since diagnosis [years]

3.08 (SD: 2.70)

3.64 (SD: 4.46)

2.69 (SD: 2.90)

1.97 (SD: 1.10)

3.46 (SD: 4.36)

3.13 (SD: 3.02)

2.94 (SD: 3.10)

Time since first IV [years]

1.63 (SD: 1.12)

1.42 (SD: 1.00)

1.74 (SD: 0.98)

1.74 (SD: 1.06)

1.73 (SD: 0.98)

1.37 (SD: 0.91)

1.64 (SD: 1.03)

Number of injections per treated eye

13.83 (SD: 9.13)**

10.14 (SD: 6.97)

9.62 (SD: 6.25)

8.43 (SD: 5.89)*

11.42 (SD: 6.94)

10.13 (SD: 6.88)

11.06 (SD: 7.6)

Feeling at time of interviewa

3.17 (SD: 0.69)

3.4 (SD: 0.91)*

2.83 (SD: 0.78)**

2.79 (SD: 0.83)*

3.29 (SD: 0.69)

3.35 (SD: 0.67)

3.08 (SD: 0.78)

Change in VAb

0.04 (SD: 0.22)

0.00 (SD: 0.24)

0.06 (SD: 0.18)

0.03 (SD: 0.18)

− 0.01 (SD: 0.23)

0.03 (SD: 0.22)

0.04 (SD: 0.21)

Perceived change in eyesightc

0.90 (SD: 22.27)

-2.37 (SD: 21.43)

5.33 (SD: 23.18)**

− 2.20 (SD: 10.76)

8.05 (SD: 23.98)

− 12.88 (SD: 20.36)**

0.94 (SD: 21.97)

n (%)

nAMD (the other cases are DME)

41 (56.9%)*

20 (80.0%)

41 (63.1%)

21 (75.0%)

20 (83.3%)

13 (65.0%)

156 (66.7%)

Female

37 (51.4%)

16 (64.0%)

32 (49.2%)

16 (57.1%)

15 (62.5%)

9 (45.0%)

125 (53.4%)

Both eyes affected

31 (43.1%)

13 (52.0%)

30 (46.2%)

7 (25.0%)*

11 (45.8%)

9 (45.0%)

101 (43.2%)

Rate own adherence as 100%

63 (87.5%)

19 (76.0%)

52 (81.3%)

27 (96.4%)*

19 (79.2%)

11 (55.0%)**

191 (82.0%)

Quality of life affected stronglyd

26 (36.6%)

17 (70.8%)***

11 (17.5%)**

6 (21.4%)

5 (20.8%)

14 (73.7%)***

79 (34.5%)

Need or prefer daily helpe

23 (32.4%)

13 (52.0%)*

14 (22.6%)*

6 (23.1%)

6 (28.6%)

12 (60.0%)**

74 (32.9%)

Cataract

31 (43.1%)

8 (32.0%)

24 (36.9%)

8 (28.6%)

12 (50.0%)

10 (50.0%)

93 (39.7%)

Glaucoma

8 (11.1%)

6 (24.0%)*

6 (9.2%)

4 (14.3%)

1 (4.2%)

2 (10.0%)

27 (11.5%)

Diabetic retinopathy

26 (36.1%)*

4 (16.0%)

19 (29.2%)

4 (14.3%)

4 (16.7%)

6 (30.0%)

63 (26.9%)

Cancer

4 (5.6%)

1 (4.0%)

0 (0.0%)*

2 (7.1%)

2 (8.3%)

2 (10.0%)

11 (4.7%)

  1. Percentages of categorical variables may not correspond to the fraction of the cluster size as a number of patients refused to answer / did not know the answer to some of the interview questions. Significant α = 0.05 for comparisons of the respective cluster with all other patients; * p value < 0.05, ** p value < 0.01, *** p value < 0.001; significant comparisons made bold. aPatients were asked to rate how they currently felt on a scale from 1 = Excellent to 5 = Bad. bChange from first intravitreal injection to study interview. cPatients were asked to rate their eyesight at therapy start and at the time of interview on a scale from 0 to 100. dPatients were asked to what extent their disease limits their quality of life; answers were 1 = Not at all, 2 = Rather not, 3 = Somehow, and 4 = Strongly. For analysis, the variable was dichotomized into strongly affected (4) and not strongly affected patients (1, 2, 3). e Patients were asked whether they needed help in daily life; answers were 1 = Yes, in almost any situation, 2 = Yes, in some particular situations, 3 = I manage on my own but prefer assistance, 4 = No support needed. For analysis, this variable was dichotomized into a group needing no support (4) and a group needing or preferring support (1, 2, 3). DME, diabetic macular edema; nAMD, neovascular age-related macular degeneration; SD, standard deviation; VA, visual acuity