Retina specialists treating cystoid macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion recommend different treatments for patients than they would choose for themselves
AimsTo evaluate the presence of cognitive bias among retinal specialists when recommending treatment options for cystoid macular oedema (CMO) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).MethodsTwo randomly chosen samples of retina specialists were surveyed regarding their treatment and dosing regimen...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of ophthalmology 2016-10, Vol.100 (10), p.1332-1336 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | AimsTo evaluate the presence of cognitive bias among retinal specialists when recommending treatment options for cystoid macular oedema (CMO) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).MethodsTwo randomly chosen samples of retina specialists were surveyed regarding their treatment and dosing regimen choices among three antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) biologics (aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab), intravitreal steroid, focal laser and observation for the treatment of CMO secondary to RVO. The first group was asked to make recommendations for two hypothetical patients: one with CMO secondary to branch RVO (BRVO) and the second with CMO secondary to central RVO (CRVO). The second group was asked to make recommendations as if they themselves were the hypothetical patient with the same disease processes.ResultsThe survey was completed by 492 respondents (20.1%). When comparing anti-VEGF agents for patients with BRVO, a majority of physicians recommended bevacizumab (60.5%) over ranibizumab (37.8%) and aflibercept (1.7%; p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0007-1161 1468-2079 |
DOI: | 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307849 |