Loading…

Patient Use of Dietary Supplements, Home Monitoring, or Genetic Testing for Nonneovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Purpose: This work evaluated the use and type of dietary supplements and home monitoring for nonneovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD), as well as the prevalence of genetic testing among patients with AMD. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted of 129 participants older than 50 y...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of vitreoretinal diseases (Print) 2021-09, Vol.5 (5), p.389-395
Main Authors: Tsou, Brittany C., Liu, T.Y. Alvin, Kong, Jun, Bressler, Susan B., Arevalo, J. Fernando, Brady, Christopher J., Handa, James T., Meyerle, Catherine B., Scott, Adrienne W., Wenick, Adam S., Bressler, Neil M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose: This work evaluated the use and type of dietary supplements and home monitoring for nonneovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD), as well as the prevalence of genetic testing among patients with AMD. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted of 129 participants older than 50 years who completed self-administered questionnaires regarding usage and type of dietary supplements and home monitoring, as well as the participants’ use of genetic testing for AMD. Results: Of 91 participants with AMD, 83 (91.2%) took vitamins, including 55 (60.4%) who used an Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) or AREDS2 formulation. Of 38 without AMD, 31 (81.6%) took vitamins (difference from participants with AMD = 9.6% [95% CI, 0%-23.2%]), including 2 on an AREDS formulation. Among 82 participants with AMD who were AREDS candidates (intermediate or advanced AMD in 1 or both eyes), 51 (62.2%; 95% CI, 51.7%-72.7%) took an AREDS or AREDS2 formulation, and 31 (37.8%) did not (5 were unsure). Additionally, 50 (61.0%; 95% CI, 50.4%-71.6%) AREDS candidates did some type of home monitoring. Only 1 (1.2%; 95% CI, 0%-3.6%) underwent genetic testing for AMD. Among 9 with AMD who were not AREDS candidates, 4 (44.4%) used an AREDS formulation, 4 (44.4%) did not, and 1 (11.1%) was unsure; only 1 (11.1%) of these 9 performed home monitoring. Conclusions: Despite similar results from past surveys and AREDS2 data supporting supplement use in 2013 and home monitoring in 2014, these findings suggest about one-third of AREDS candidates do not do so, providing further support for improving education regarding appropriate supplement and home monitoring usage. Genetic testing for AMD also appears infrequent.
ISSN:2474-1264
2474-1272
DOI:10.1177/2474126421989228