Advertisement

Drugs & Aging

, Volume 32, Issue 7, pp 569–581 | Cite as

Pharmacotherapy and Adherence Issues in Treating Elderly Patients with Glaucoma

  • David C. BroadwayEmail author
  • Heidi Cate
Review Article

Abstract

Glaucoma is a leading cause of visual morbidity throughout the world and is an age-related condition, the prevalence of which rises significantly with increasing age. Glaucoma, a condition affecting the optic nerve, has a variety of subtypes with multiple aetiological factors, the most important of which are intraocular pressure (IOP) and increasing age. Treatment by lowering of IOP is the only current method, for which there is evidence, by which the rate of progressive visual deterioration can be slowed or halted. Although there are surgical and laser treatments that are efficacious in lowering IOP, the most common manner in which patients with glaucoma control their IOP is with administration of daily topical ocular hypotensive drugs (eye drops). The variety of topical drugs utilised in the management of glaucoma all have the potential to have adverse effects and/or interactions with concomitant medications, many of which may be used for other age-related conditions. Adherence with appropriate medicines has a major effect on the outcome of medical conditions and this aspect applies to the management of glaucoma. There are certain specific issues that relate to the administration of topical agents, with respect to both adverse effects and adherence. Although many suspect poor adherence in elderly patients with glaucoma, relative to younger patients, adequate evidence for this is lacking. Furthermore, the manner by which adherence issues could be improved remains inadequately understood and poorly addressed. The aims of this article were to review, from a clinical perspective, the medical therapies currently used for glaucoma and discuss adherence issues with respect to the population of patients with glaucoma, who tend to be relatively elderly.

Keywords

Glaucoma Latanoprost Bimatoprost Brimonidine Normal Tension Glaucoma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

David C. Broadway and Heidi Cate have no acknowledgments in respect of this review.

Author contributions

Both authors devised the concept of the article and contributed equally to the research and writing of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

David C. Broadway and Heidi Cate have no conflicts of interest to declare that are of direct relevance to the content of this review. No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation and/or writing of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tsai JC. Medication adherence in glaucoma: approaches for optimizing patient compliance. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17:190–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wensor MD, McCarty CA, Stanislavsky YL, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:733–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K. et al. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1661–1669.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Wolfs RC, et al. The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in a population-based study in The Netherlands. The Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1851–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martinez GS, Campbell AJ, Reinken J, et al. Prevalence of ocular disease in a population study of subjects 65 years old and older. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;94:181–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tielsch JM, Sommer A, Katz J, et al. Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma. The Baltimore Eye Survey. JAMA. 1991;266:369–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klein BE, Klein R, Sponsel WE, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:1499–504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quigley HA, Enger C, Katz J, et al. Risk factors for the development of glaucomatous visual field loss in ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:644–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leske MC, Connell AM, Wu SY, et al. Risk factors for open-angle glaucoma. The Barbados Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:918–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mukesh BN, McCarty CA, Rait JL, et al. Five-year incidence of open-angle glaucoma: the visual impairment project. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1047–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Friedman DS, Jampel HD, Munoz B, et al. The prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among Blacks and Whites 73 years and older: The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Glaucoma Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:1625–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leske MC, Wu SY, Hennis A, et al. Risk factors for incident open-angle glaucoma: the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:85–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zheng Y, Lavanya R, Wu R, et al. Prevalence and causes of visual impairment and blindness in an urban Indian population: the Singapore Indian Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:1798–804.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jiang X, Varma R, Wu S, et al. Baseline risk factors that predict the development of open-angle glaucoma in a population: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2012;119:2245–53.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    David R, Tessler Z, Yassur Y. Epidemiology of acute angle-closure glaucoma: incidence and seasonal variations. Ophthalmologica. 1985;191:4–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Teikari J, Raivio I, Nurminen M. Incidence of acute glaucoma in Finland from 1973 to 1982. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1987;225:357–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fujita K, Negishi K, Fujiki K, et al. Epidemiology of acute angle-closure glaucoma. Jpn J Clin Ophthalmol. 1996;37:625–9.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seah SK, Foster PJ, Chew PT, et al. Incidence of acute primary angle-closure glaucoma in Singapore. An island-wide survey. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:1436–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wong TY, Foster PJ, Seah SK, et al. Rates of hospital admissions for primary angle closure glaucoma among Chinese, Malays, and Indians in Singapore. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:990–2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lai JS, Liu DT, Tham CC, et al. Epidemiology of acute primary angle-closure glaucoma in the Hong Kong Chinese population: prospective study. Hong Kong Med J. 2001;7:118–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ivanisević M, Erceg M, Smoljanović A, et al. The incidence and seasonal variations of acute primary angle-closure glaucoma. Coll Antropol. 2002;26:41–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:701–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, et al. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:1268–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, et al. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:48–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    The Collaborative Normal Tension Glaucoma Study Group. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:498–505.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Anderson DR, Drance SM, Schulzer M. Natural history of normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:247–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Drance S, Anderson DR, Schulzer M. Risk factors for progression of visual field abnormalities in normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;131:699–708.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hafez AS, Lesk MR. Role of ocular blood flow in the pathogenesis of glaucoma. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, Hitchings RA, Crowston JG, editors. Glaucoma: medical diagnosis and therapy. London: Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 88–97.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tanna AP. Normal-tension glaucoma. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, Hitchings RA, Crowston JG, editors. Glaucoma: medical diagnosis and therapy. London: Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 378–86.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, et al. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1943–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. (AGIS) Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS 7): the relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:429–40.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nouri-Mahdavi K, Hoffman D, Coleman AL, et al. Predictive factors for glaucomatous visual field progression in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS). Ophthalmology. 2004;111:1627–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Balaszi AG, et al. Canadian Glaucoma Study: 2. Risk factors for the progression of open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126:1030–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Artes PH, et al. Canadian Glaucoma Study: 3. Impact of risk factors and intraocular pressure reduction on the rates of visual field change. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128:1249–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Garway-Heath DF, Crabb DP, Bunce C, et al. Latanoprost treatment for open angle glaucoma. The United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Lancet. 2014. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62111-5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Friedman DS, Freeman E, Munoz B, et al. Glaucoma and mobility performance: the Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:2232–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Haymes SA, LeBlanc RP, Nicholela MT, et al. Risk of falls and motor vehicle collisions in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:1149–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lee AJ, Wang JJ, Kifley A, et al. Open-angle glaucoma and cardiovascular mortality: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:1069–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Grodum K, Heijl A, Bengtsson B. Glaucoma and mortality. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004;242:397–401.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Knudtson MD, Klein BE, Klein R, et al. Age-related eye disease, quality of life, and functional activity. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:807–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Borger PH, van Leeuwen R, Hulsman CA, et al. Is there a direct association between age-related eye diseases and mortality? The Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:1292–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zimmerman TJ, Kaufman HE, Timolo S. A beta-adrenergic blocking agent for the treatment of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1977;95:601–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Coakes RL, Brubaker RF. The mechanism of timolol in lowering intraocular pressure in the normal eye. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978;96:2045–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Urtti A, Rouhiainen H, Kaila T, Saana V. Controlled ocular timolol delivery: systemic absorption and intraocular pressure effects in humans. Pharm Res. 1994;11:1278–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nelson WL, Fraunfelder FT, Sills JM, et al. Adverse respiratory and cardiovascular events attributed to timolol ophthalmic solution, 1978–1985. Am J Ophthalmol. 1986;102:606–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Avorn J, Everitt DE, Weiss S. Increased antidepressant use in patients prescribed ß-blockers. JAMA. 1986;255:357–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kaeser HE. Drug-induced myasthenic syndromes. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica. 1984;100:39–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Alexander CL, Miller SJ, Abel SR. Prostaglandin analog treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ann Pharmacother. 2002;36:504–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Toris CB, Gabelt BT, Kaufman PL. Update on the mechanism of action of topical prostaglandins for intraocular pressure reduction. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53:S107–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Alm A, Camras CB, Watson PG. Phase III latanoprost studies in Scandinavia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Surv Ophthalmol. 1997;41:S105–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hedner J, Everts B, Möller CS. Latanoprost and respiratory function in asthmatic patients: randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled crossover evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1305–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sjöquist B, Stjernschantz J. Ocular and systemic pharmacokinetics of latanoprost in humans. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002;47:S6–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Schumer RA, Camras CB, Mandahl AK. Latanoprost and cystoid macular edema: is there a causal relation? Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2000;11:94–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Krauss AHP, Woodward DF. Update on the mechanism of action of bimatoprost: a review and discussion of new evidence. Surv Ophthalmol. 2004;49:S5–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sugrue MF. Pharmacological and ocular hypotensive properties of topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2000;19:87–112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Becker B. Decrease in intraocular pressure in man by a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, Diamox. Am J Ophthalmol. 1954;37:13–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    DeSantis L. Preclinical overview of brinzolamide. Surv Ophthalmol. 2000;44:S119–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Epstein DL, Grant WM. Carbonic anhydrase inhibitor side effects: serum chemical analysis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1977;95:1378–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Silver LH. The Brinzolamide Primary Therapy Study Group. Clinical efficacy and safety of brinzolamide (Azopt™), a new topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitor for primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:400–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Maren TH, Conroy CW, Wynns GC, Levy NS. Ocular absorption, blood levels, and excretion of dorzolamide, a topically active carbonic anhydrase inhibitor. J Ocul Pharm Ther. 1997;13:23–30.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Toris CB, Gleason ML, Camras CB, et al. Effects of brimonidine on aqueous humour dynamics in human eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:1514–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Detry-Morel M, Dutrieux C. Treatment of glaucoma with brimonidine (Alphagan 0.2 %). J Fr Ophtalmol. 2000;23:763–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Toris CB, Tafoya ME, Camras CB, et al. Effects of apraclonidine on aqueous humor dynamics in human eyes. Ophthalmology. 1995;102:456–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Maus TL, Nau C, Brubaker RF. Comparison of the early effects of brimonidine and apraclonidine as topical ocular hypotensive agents. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:586–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Reynolds AC. Alpha agonists. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, Hitchings RA, Crowston JG, editors. Glaucoma: medical diagnosis and therapy. London: Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 566–76.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gerente VM, Biondi AC, Barbosa CP, et al. Effect of brimonidine tartrate 0.15 % on scotopic pupil: controlled trial. J Ocul Pharm Ther. 2007;23:476–480.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Katz LJ. Twelve-month evaluation of brimonidine-purite versus brimonidine in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. J Glaucoma. 2002;11:119–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Blondeau P, Rousseau JA. Allergic reactions to brimonidine in patients treated for glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol. 2002;37:21–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Adkins JC, Balfour JA. Brimonidine: a review of its pharmacological properties and clinical potential in the management of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Drugs Aging. 1998;12:225–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Acheampong A, Tang-Liu DDS. Measurement of brimonidine concentrations in human plasma by a highly sensitive gas chromatography/mass spectrometric assay. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 1995;13:995–1002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Drance SM, Bensted M, Schulzer M. Pilocarpine and intraocular pressure. Duration of effectiveness of 4 percent and 8 percent pilocarpine instillation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1974;91:104–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Grierson I, Lee WR, Abraham S. Effects of pilocarpine on the morphology of the human outflow apparatus. Br J Ophthalmol. 1978;62:302–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Shiroma LO, Costa VP. Parasympathomimetics. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, Hitchings RA, Crowston JG, editors. Glaucoma: medical diagnosis and therapy. London: Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 577–82.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    D’Alena P, Ferguson W. Adverse effects after glycerol orally and mannitol parenterally. Arch Ophthalmol. 1966;75:201–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Frank MSB, Nahata MC, Hilty MD. Glycerol: a review of its pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, adverse reactions, and clinical use. Pharmacotherapy. 1981;1:147–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Higginbotham EJ. Considerations in glaucoma therapy: fixed combinations versus their component medications. Clin Ophthalmol. 2010;4:1–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hopes M, Broadway DC. Preservative-free treatment in glaucoma is a sensible and realistic aim for the future. Eur Ophthalmol Rev. 2010;4:23–8.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stewart WC, Day DG, Holmes KT, et al. Effect of timolol 0.5 % gel and solution on pulmonary function in older glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma. 2001;10:227–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Lama PJ. Systemic adverse effects of beta-adrenergic blockers: an evidence-based assessment. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;134:749–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Freedman SF, Freedman NJ, Shields MB, et al. Effects of ocular carteolol and timolol on plasma high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;116:600–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Quaranta L, Katsanos A, Floriani I, et al. Circadian intraocular pressure and blood pressure reduction with Timolol 0.5 % solution and Timogel 0.1 % in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;52:1552–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Broadway DC, Drance SM. Glaucoma and vasospasm. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:862–70.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Meuche C, Heidrich H, Bleckmann H. Raynaud syndrome following timolol-containing eyedrops. Fortschr Ophthalmol. 1990;87:45–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Franssen C, Wollersheim H, de Haan A, et al. The influence of different beta-blocking drugs on the peripheral circulation in Raynaud’s phenomenon and in hypertension. J Clin Pharmacol. 1992;32:652–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Khawaja AP, Chan MP, Broadway DC, et al. Systemic medication and intraocular pressure in a British population: the EPIC-Norfolk Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:1501–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Spooner JJ, Bullano M, Ikeda LI, et al. Rates of discontinuation and change of glaucoma therapy in a managed care setting. Am J Manag Care. 2002;8:S255–61.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Cate H, Bhattacharya D, Clark A, et al. Improving adherence to glaucoma medication: a randomized controlled trial of a patient-centred intervention (The Norwich Adherence Glaucoma Study). BMC Ophthalmol. 2014;14:32.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Gerber SL, Cantor LB, Brater DC. Systemic drug interactions with topical glaucoma medications. Surv Ophthalmol. 1990;35:205–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Kinoshita H, Taniguchi T, Nishiguchi M, et al. An autopsy case of combined drug intoxication involving verapamil, metoprolol and digoxin. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;133:107–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Thomson Healthcare Inc. Interaction effects of apraclonidine, brimonidine, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors. Micromedex 2007 and United States Pharmacopeia 2004.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Tabbara KF, Al-Faisal Z, Al-Rashed W. Interaction between acetazolamine and cyclosporine. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:832–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Steinert RF, Thomas JV, Boger WP 3rd. Long-term drift and continued efficacy after multiyear timolol therapy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1981;99:100–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Brubaker RF. Flow of aqueous humor in humans. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991;32:3145–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Quigley HA, Vitale S. Models of open-angle glaucoma prevalence and incidence in the United States. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:83–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Zimmerman TJ, Zalta AH. Facilitating patient compliance in glaucoma therapy. Surv Ophthalmol. 1983;28:S252–8.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Weinreb RN. Compliance with medical treatment of glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 1992;1:134–8.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Schwartz GF. Persistency and tolerability of ocular hypotensive agents: population-based evidence in the management of glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137:S1–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Horne R. Compliance, adherence, and concordance: implications for asthma treatment. Chest. 2006;130:65S–72S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Haynes RB, Ackloo E, Sahota N, et al. Interventions for enhancing medication adherence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;2:CD000011.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Schwartz GF, Platt R. Measuring persistency and intraocular pressure-controlled days in patients receiving topical glaucoma medications. Am J Manag Care. 2002;8:S278–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Deokule S, Sadiq S, Shah S. Chronic open angle glaucoma: patient awareness of the nature of the disease, topical medication, compliance and the prevalence of systemic symptoms. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2004;24:9–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Tsai JC, McClure CA, Ramos SE, et al. Compliance barriers and glaucoma; a systematic classification. J Glaucoma. 2003;12:393–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Okeke CO, Quigley HA, Jampel HD, et al. Adherence with topical glaucoma medication monitored electronically the Travatan Dosing Aid study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:191–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Kass MA, Gordon M, Meltzer DW. Can ophthalmologists correctly identify patients defaulting from pilocarpine therapy? Am J Ophthalmol. 1986;101:524–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Kass MA, Gordon M, Morley RE Jr, et al. Compliance with topical timolol treatment. Am J Ophthalmol. 1987;103:188–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Winfield AJ, Jessiman D, Williams A, et al. A study of the causes of non-compliance by patients prescribed eyedrops. Br J Ophthalmol. 1990;74:477–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Sleath B, Robin AL, Covert D, et al. Patient-reported behavior and problems in using glaucoma medications. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:431–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Robin AL, Novack GD, Covert DW, et al. Adherence in glaucoma: objective measurements of once-daily and adjunctive medication use. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144:533–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Stewart WC, Chorak RP, Hunt HH, et al. Factors associated with visual loss in patients with advanced glaucomatous changes in the optic nerve head. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;116:176–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Caprioli J, Coleman AL. Intraocular pressure fluctuation: a risk factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1123–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Rossi GC, Pasinetti GM, Scudeller L, et al. Do adherence rates and glaucomatous visual field progression correlate? Eur J Ophthalmol. 2011;21:410–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Sleath B, Blalock S, Covert D, et al. The relationship between glaucoma medication adherence, eye drop technique, and visual field defect severity. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2398–402.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Nordstrom BL, Friedman DS, Mozaffari E, et al. Persistence and adherence with topical glaucoma therapy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;140:598–606.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Patel SC, Spaeth GL. Compliance in patients prescribed eye drops for glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg. 1995;26:233–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Olthoff CM, Schouten JS, van de Borne BW, et al. Noncompliance with ocular hypotensive treatment in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: an evidence-based review. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:953–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Sackett D, Jackett D, Snow J. Magnitude and measurement of compliance. In: Haynes B, Wayne Taylor D, Sackett D (eds.) Compliance in healthcare. Baltimore, London: The John Hopkins University Press; 1979. pp. 11–22.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Lacey J, Cate H, Broadway DC. Barriers to adherence with glaucoma medications: a qualitative research study. Eye. 2009;23:924–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Cooper C, Dennison E, Edwards M, Litwic A. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis. Medicographia. 2013;35:145–51.Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Louis ED, Ottman R, Hauser WA. How common is the most common adult movement disorder? Estimates of the prevalence of essential tremor throughout the world. Mov Disord. 1998;13:5–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Prince M, Bryce R, Albanese E, et al. The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzheimer Dement. 2013;9(63–75):e2.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Kass MA, Hodapp E, Gordon M, et al. Part I. Patient administration of eyedrops: interview. Ann Ophthalmol. 1982;14:775–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Kass MA, Hodapp E, Gordon M, et al. Patient administration of eyedrops: observation. Part II. Ann Ophthalmol. 1982;14:889–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Tsai T, Robin AL, Smith JP III. An evaluation of how glaucoma patients use topical medications: a pilot study. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2007;105:29–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Kahook MY. Developments in dosing aids and adherence devices for glaucoma therapy: current and future perspectives. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2007;4:261–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Sclar DA, Skaer TL, Chin A, et al. Effectiveness of the C CapTM in promoting prescription refill compliance among patients with glaucoma. Clin Ther. 1991;13(3):396–400.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Hughes C. Medication non-adherence in the elderly. Drugs Aging. 2004;21:793–811.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Cate H, Battacharya D, Clark A, et al. Patterns of adherence behaviour for patients with glaucoma. Eye. 2013;27:545–53.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Giaconi JA, Law SK, Coleman AL, Caprioli J (eds). Pearls of glaucoma management. 1st edition. Heidleberg: Springer; 2010. p. 235.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Gurwitz JH, Glynn RJ, Monane M, et al. Treatment for glaucoma: Adherence by the elderly. Am J Pub Health. 1993;83:711–6.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Taylor SA, Galbraith SM, Mills RP. Causes of non-compliance with drug regimens in glaucoma patients: a qualitative study. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2002;18:401–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Chang DS, Friedman DS, Frazier T, et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for nonadherence with once-daily glaucoma medications. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:1396–402.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Tsai JC. A comprehensive perspective on patient adherence to topical glaucoma therapy. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:S30–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Domino FJ. Improving adherence to treatment for hypertension. Am Fam Physician. 2005;71:2089–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Miller NH, Hill M, Kottke T, Ockene IS. The multilevel compliance challenge: recommendations for a call to action. A statement for healthcare professionals. Circulation. 1997;95:1085–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Sheppard J, Warner J, Kelley K. An evaluation of the effectiveness of a nurse-led glaucoma monitoring clinic. Ophthalmic Nurs. 2003;7:15–21.Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Beckers HJ, Webers CA, Busch MJ, et al. Adherence improvement in Dutch glaucoma patients: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Ophthalmol. 2013;91:610–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Norell SE. Improving medication compliance: a randomised clinical trial. Br Med J. 1979;2:1031–3.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Okeke CO, Quigley HA, Jampel HD, et al. Interventions improve poor adherence with once daily glaucoma medications in electronically monitored patients. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:2286–93.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Stryker JE, Beck AD, Primo SA, et al. An exploratory study of factors influencing glaucoma treatment adherence. J Glaucoma. 2010;19:66–72.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Kripalani S, Yao X, Haynes RB. Interventions to enhance medication adherence in chronic medical conditions: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:540–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Gray TA, Fenerty C, Harper R, et al. Individualised patient care as an adjunct to standard care for promoting adherence to ocular hypotensive therapy: an exploratory randomised controlled trial. Eye. 2012;26:407–17.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyNorfolk and Norwich University HospitalNorwichUK
  2. 2.School of PharmacyUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  3. 3.School of Biological ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations