A Mobile Phone Informational Reminder to Improve Eye Care Adherence Among Diabetic Patients in Rural China: A Randomized Controlled Trial

To determine whether short message service (SMS) reminders improve adherence to scheduled ocular examinations among patients with diabetes in rural China. Randomized controlled trial. This study enrolled consecutive patients with diabetes scheduled for eye examinations at 5 hospitals in low-income a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of ophthalmology 2018-10, Vol.194, p.54-62
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Tingting, Zhu, Wenhui, Tang, Bobby, Jin, Ling, Fu, Haoxiang, Chen, Yuqun, Wang, Congyao, Zhang, Guoshan, Wang, Jun, Ye, Tiantian, Xiao, Di, Vignarajan, Janardhan, Xiao, Baixiang, Kanagasingam, Yogessan, Congdon, Nathan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To determine whether short message service (SMS) reminders improve adherence to scheduled ocular examinations among patients with diabetes in rural China. Randomized controlled trial. This study enrolled consecutive patients with diabetes scheduled for eye examinations at 5 hospitals in low-income areas of Guangdong, China from March 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016. Participants were randomized (1:1) to receive automated SMS reminders containing information about diabetic retinopathy (DR) 1 week and 3 days prior to scheduled eye appointments (Intervention) or to appointments without reminders (Control). Regression models following intention-to-treat principles were used to estimate the association between the main outcome (attendance within ± 1 week of scheduled visit) and membership in the Intervention group, with and without adjustment for other potential predictors of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included change in DR knowledge score (1, worst; 5, best) and endline satisfaction with care (3, worst; 15, best). Among 233 patients, 119 (51.1%) were randomized to Intervention (age 59.7 ± 11.3 years, 52.1% men) and 114 (48.9%) to Control (58.7 ± 9.50 years, 49.1% men). All participants provided data for the main study outcome. Attendance at scheduled appointments for the Intervention group (51/119, [42.9%]) was significantly higher than for Controls (16/114, [14.0%], between-group difference 28.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17.9%, 39.8%], P < .001). Factors associated with attendance in multiple regression models included Intervention group membership (Relative Risk [RR] 3.04, 95% CI, 1.73–5.33, P < .001) and baseline DR knowledge (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21–1.78, P 
ISSN:0002-9394
1879-1891
DOI:10.1016/j.ajo.2018.07.006