A 2-hour information session and patient recall has minimal impact on glaucoma-treatment persistence in a mature practice

• Published in: Journal of glaucoma Vol. 21; no. 6; p. 379
• Main Authors: Blondeau, Pierre, Carbonneau, Marjorie, Esper, Philip, Turcotte, Pierre-Christophe
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2012
• Subjects: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists - administration & dosage; Aged; Antihypertensive Agents - administration & dosage; Databases, Factual; Drug Prescriptions - statistics & numerical data; Drug Utilization - statistics & numerical data; Glaucoma - drug therapy; Humans; Mental Recall; Patient Compliance; Patient Education as Topic; Prostaglandins F, Synthetic - administration & dosage; Time Factors
• ISSN: 1536-481X
• DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3182127a9b

To study the impact of a 2-hour information session and 3 patients' phone calls on patient persistence with glaucoma medication. All patients with glaucoma treatment, part of a 27-year old solo glaucoma practice, were invited to attend the information session. Patients who attended the session (n=342) were contacted by phone 1, 4, 10 months later and regular use of drops was stressed. Patients were unaware of the study. We compared the persistence of the patients before and after attending the session, and their persistence to that of patients who did not attend (n=1187). Persistence with glaucoma medication was assessed by examination of data (2002 to 2007) from a provincial medical and drug insurance database. Patients attending the session had glaucoma for 10 years. They had a better persistence than those who did not attend (P<0.05). Their persistence remained the same 1 year after attending the session but tended to be improved in the first 180 days (P<0.076). During the study period, there was a 4% increase in overall persistence (P<0.05). This could be due to an increase in prostaglandins prescriptions and changes in β-blockers formulation. The information session and patient's recalls had a limited impact on patient persistence. This could be due to the selection of a population already persistent (78.9%). The results could have been different in less persistent patients and new patients. It could be different in another practice setting.