Disparities in Amblyopia Treatment Outcomes: The Impact of Sociodemographic Factors, Treatment Compliance, and Age of Diagnosis.

IF 13.1 1区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.09.021
Kate Matsunaga, Archeta Rajagopalan, Sudha Nallasamy, Angeline Nguyen, Alexander de Castro-Abeger, Mark S Borchert, Melinda Y Chang
{"title":"Disparities in Amblyopia Treatment Outcomes: The Impact of Sociodemographic Factors, Treatment Compliance, and Age of Diagnosis.","authors":"Kate Matsunaga, Archeta Rajagopalan, Sudha Nallasamy, Angeline Nguyen, Alexander de Castro-Abeger, Mark S Borchert, Melinda Y Chang","doi":"10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.09.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To identify clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with disparities in amblyopia treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective chart review.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Children ≤ 8 years of age diagnosed and treated for unilateral refractive or strabismic amblyopia at our institution from 2012 to 2022.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Children with amblyopia were categorized by outcome: resolved amblyopia (< 0.2 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] interocular difference [IOD] in visual acuity [VA] or no fixation preference in nonverbal patients) or persistent amblyopia. Demographic and clinical data were recorded from the medical record. Zip codes were used to calculate Childhood Opportunity Index (COI) scores, estimated annual household income, and distance to hospital.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Sociodemographic and clinical factors were compared between children with resolved and persistent amblyopia. Factors significant at P < 0.10 on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 168 patients met inclusion criteria, and 131 patients (78%) had resolved amblyopia. Demographic factors associated with resolution of amblyopia were younger age at diagnosis (3.3 ± 1.7 years vs. 4.5 ± 1.9 years; P = 0.0009), English as the primary language (79.4% vs. 62.2%; P = 0.04), higher estimated annual income ($83 315.93 ± $29 276.64 vs. $71 623.00 ± $26 842.56; P = 0.03), higher COI scores (50.9 ± 27.3 vs. 40.0 ± 26.4; P = 0.03), and living farther from our institution (28.6 ± 37.6 miles vs. 14.9 ± 12.7 miles; P = 0.003). Patients with resolved amblyopia also had higher rates of treatment compliance (83.2% ± 25.0% vs. 75.6% ± 24.4%; P = 0.009) and shorter delays in follow-up (40.1 ± 76.8 days vs. 61.1 ± 90.4 days; P = 0.02). Amblyopia persistence was borderline associated with governmental insurance and higher presenting IOD in VA (both P = 0.06). On multivariate analysis, only younger age at amblyopia diagnosis (P = 0.0010) remained significantly associated with amblyopia resolution.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that disparities in amblyopia outcomes are related to differences in age at diagnosis. Interventions to lower the age at which amblyopia is diagnosed, such as programs to improve vision screening rates and access to pediatric eye care in at-risk groups, may directly address inequities in rates of amblyopia resolution.</p><p><strong>Financial disclosure(s): </strong>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.</p>","PeriodicalId":19533,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.09.021","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To identify clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with disparities in amblyopia treatment outcomes.

Design: Retrospective chart review.

Participants: Children ≤ 8 years of age diagnosed and treated for unilateral refractive or strabismic amblyopia at our institution from 2012 to 2022.

Methods: Children with amblyopia were categorized by outcome: resolved amblyopia (< 0.2 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] interocular difference [IOD] in visual acuity [VA] or no fixation preference in nonverbal patients) or persistent amblyopia. Demographic and clinical data were recorded from the medical record. Zip codes were used to calculate Childhood Opportunity Index (COI) scores, estimated annual household income, and distance to hospital.

Main outcome measures: Sociodemographic and clinical factors were compared between children with resolved and persistent amblyopia. Factors significant at P < 0.10 on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable regression model.

Results: A total of 168 patients met inclusion criteria, and 131 patients (78%) had resolved amblyopia. Demographic factors associated with resolution of amblyopia were younger age at diagnosis (3.3 ± 1.7 years vs. 4.5 ± 1.9 years; P = 0.0009), English as the primary language (79.4% vs. 62.2%; P = 0.04), higher estimated annual income ($83 315.93 ± $29 276.64 vs. $71 623.00 ± $26 842.56; P = 0.03), higher COI scores (50.9 ± 27.3 vs. 40.0 ± 26.4; P = 0.03), and living farther from our institution (28.6 ± 37.6 miles vs. 14.9 ± 12.7 miles; P = 0.003). Patients with resolved amblyopia also had higher rates of treatment compliance (83.2% ± 25.0% vs. 75.6% ± 24.4%; P = 0.009) and shorter delays in follow-up (40.1 ± 76.8 days vs. 61.1 ± 90.4 days; P = 0.02). Amblyopia persistence was borderline associated with governmental insurance and higher presenting IOD in VA (both P = 0.06). On multivariate analysis, only younger age at amblyopia diagnosis (P = 0.0010) remained significantly associated with amblyopia resolution.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that disparities in amblyopia outcomes are related to differences in age at diagnosis. Interventions to lower the age at which amblyopia is diagnosed, such as programs to improve vision screening rates and access to pediatric eye care in at-risk groups, may directly address inequities in rates of amblyopia resolution.

Financial disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
弱视治疗结果的差异:社会人口因素、治疗依从性和诊断年龄的影响。
目的: 确定与弱视治疗效果差异相关的临床和社会人口因素:确定与弱视治疗结果差异相关的临床和社会人口因素:研究对象2012年至2022年期间,在我院诊断并治疗单侧屈光性或斜视性弱视的8岁以下儿童:方法:将弱视儿童按结果分类:弱视缓解(主要结果测量:比较弱视缓解和弱视持续的儿童的社会人口学和临床因素。结果168名患者符合纳入标准,其中131名(78%)弱视得到缓解。与弱视缓解相关的人口统计学因素有:诊断时年龄较小(3.3±1.7 岁 vs. 4.5±1.9岁,p=0.0009)、英语为主要语言(79.4% vs. 62.2%,p=0.04)、估计年收入较高($83,315.93±29,276.64 美元 vs. 71,623.00±26,842.56 美元,P=0.03),COI 评分更高(50.9±27.3 vs. 40.0±26.4,P=0.03),居住地离本机构更远(28.6±37.6 vs. 14.9±12.7 英里,P=0.003)。弱视缓解患者的治疗依从性更高(83.2±25.0% vs. 75.6±24.4%,p=0.009),随访延迟时间更短(40.1±76.8 vs. 61.1±90.4天,p=0.02)。弱视持续与政府保险和较高的视力IOD呈边缘相关(均为p=0.06)。在多变量分析中,只有弱视诊断年龄较小(p=0.0010)与弱视缓解仍有显著相关性:我们的研究结果表明,弱视结果的差异与诊断年龄的差异有关。降低弱视诊断年龄的干预措施,如提高视力筛查率和改善高危人群接受儿科眼科治疗的机会,可直接解决弱视矫正率不平等的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology
Ophthalmology 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
22.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
412
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: The journal Ophthalmology, from the American Academy of Ophthalmology, contributes to society by publishing research in clinical and basic science related to vision.It upholds excellence through unbiased peer-review, fostering innovation, promoting discovery, and encouraging lifelong learning.
期刊最新文献
Multimodal Imaging Findings in Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency due to Hydroxyurea. Visual Loss in Geographic Atrophy: Learnings From the Lampalizumab Trials. Concentric Macular Rings Sign in a Patient with Variant Turner Syndrome. Dandelion-like Retinal Capillary Hamartoma. Hurricane Keratopathy Induced by Anticancer Drug S-1.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1