Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- observational study (3) (remove)
Institute
Publisher
- Frontiers Media S.A. (1)
- MDPI (1)
- Wiley (1)
Purpose
The German Retina.net ROP registry and its Europe-wide successor, the EU-ROP registry, collect data from patients treated for ROP. This analysis compares input parameters of these two registries to establish a procedure for joint analyses of different registry data using exemplary datasets from the two registries.
Methods
Exemplary datasets from the two databases over a 1-year period each (German Retina.net ROP Registry, 2011, 22 infants; EU-ROP Registry, 2021, 44 infants) were compared. The parameters documented in the two databases were aligned and analysed regarding demographic parameters, treatment modalities, complications within first 24 h and retreatments.
Results
The current analysis showed that data can be aligned for joint analyses with some adjustments within the data structure. The registry with more detailed data collection (EU-ROP) needs to be reduced regarding granularity in order to align the different registries, as the registry with lower granularity determines the level of analyses that can be performed in a comparative approach. In the exemplary datasets, we observed that the overall most common ROP severity in both registries was zone II, 3+ (2011: 70.5%; 2021: 65%), with decreasing numbers of clock hours showing preretinal neovascularisations (2011: 10–12 clock hours in 29% of cases, 2021: 4–6 clock hours in 38%). The most prevalent treatment method was laser coagulation in 2011 (75%) and anti-VEGF therapy in 2021 (86.1%). Within the anti-VEGF group, all patients were treated with bevacizumab in 2011 and with ranibizumab in 2021. Retreatment rates were comparable in 2011 and 2021.
Conclusion
Data from two different ROP registries can be aligned and jointly analysed. The analysis reveals a paradigm shift in treatment modalities, from predominantly laser to anti-VEGF, and within the anti-VEGF group from bevacizumab to ranibizumab in Germany. In addition, there was a trend towards earlier treatment in 2021.
Background
Longitudinal observational studies play on an important role for evidence-based research on health services and psychiatric rehabilitation. However, information is missing about the reasons, why patients participate in such studies, and how they evaluate their participation experience.
Methods
Subsequently to their final assessment in a 2-year follow-up study on supported housing for persons with severe mental illness, n = 182 patients answered a short questionnaire on their study participation experience (prior experiences, participation reasons, burden due to study assessments, intention to participate in studies again). Basic respondent characteristics as well as symptom severity (SCL-K9) were also included in the descriptive and analytical statistics.
Results
To help other people and curiosity were cited as the main initial reasons for study participation (>85%). Further motives were significantly associated with demographic and/or clinical variables. For instance, “relieve from boredom” was more frequently reported by men and patients with substance use disorders (compared to mood disorders), and participants ‘motive” to talk about illness” was associated with higher symptom severity at study entry. Furthermore, only a small proportion of respondents indicated significant burdens by study participation and about 87% would also participate in future studies.
Conclusions
The respondents gave an overall positive evaluation regarding their participation experience in an observational study on psychiatric rehabilitation. The results additionally suggest that health and social care professionals should be responsive to the expectations and needs of patients with mental illness regarding participation in research.