Dataset Information

Predicted impact of extending the screening interval for diabetic retinopathy: the Scottish Diabetic Retinopathy Screening programme.

ABSTRACT:

Aims/hypothesis

The aim of our study was to identify subgroups of patients attending the Scottish Diabetic Retinopathy Screening (DRS) programme who might safely move from annual to two yearly retinopathy screening.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of screening data from the DRS programme collected between 2005 and 2011 for people aged ≥12 years with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in Scotland. We used hidden Markov models to calculate the probabilities of transitions to referable diabetic retinopathy (referable background or proliferative retinopathy) or referable maculopathy.

Results

The study included 155,114 individuals with no referable diabetic retinopathy or maculopathy at their first DRS examination and with one or more further DRS examinations. There were 11,275 incident cases of referable diabetic eye disease (9,204 referable maculopathy, 2,071 referable background or proliferative retinopathy). The observed transitions to referable background or proliferative retinopathy were lower for people with no visible retinopathy vs mild background retinopathy at their prior examination (respectively, 1.2% vs 8.1% for type 1 diabetes and 0.6% vs 5.1% for type 2 diabetes). The lowest probability for transitioning to referable background or proliferative retinopathy was among people with two consecutive screens showing no visible retinopathy, where the probability was <0.3% for type 1 and <0.2% for type 2 diabetes at 2 years.

Conclusions/interpretation

Transition rates to referable diabetic eye disease were lowest among people with type 2 diabetes and two consecutive screens showing no visible retinopathy. If such people had been offered two yearly screening the DRS service would have needed to screen 40% fewer people in 2009.

SUBMITTER: Looker HC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3699707 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Diabetic Retinopathy Extended Screening Study (DRESS) aims to develop and validate a new DR/diabetic macular edema (DME) risk stratification model in patients with Type 2 diabetes (DM) to identify low-risk groups who can be safely assigned to biennial or triennial screening intervals. We describe the study methodology, participants' baseline characteristics, and preliminary DR progression rates at the first annual follow-up.MethodsDRESS is a 3-year ongoing longitudinal study of patients with T2DM and no or mild non-proliferative DR (NPDR, non-referable) who underwent teleophthalmic screening under the Singapore integrated Diabetic Retinopathy Programme (SiDRP) at four SingHealth Polyclinics. Patients with referable DR/DME (> mild NPDR) or ungradable fundus images were excluded. Sociodemographic, lifestyle, medical and clinical information was obtained from medical records and interviewer-administered questionnaires at baseline. These data are extracted from medical records at 12, 24 and 36 months post-enrollment. Baseline descriptive characteristics stratified by DR severity at baseline and rates of progression to referable DR at 12-month follow-up were calculated.ResultsOf 5,840 eligible patients, 78.3% (n = 4,570, median [interquartile range [IQR] age 61.0 [55-67] years; 54.7% male; 68.0% Chinese) completed the baseline assessment. At baseline, 97.4% and 2.6% had none and mild NPDR (worse eye), respectively. Most participants had hypertension (79.2%) and dyslipidemia (92.8%); and almost half were obese (43.4%, BMI ≥ 27.5 kg/m2). Participants without DR (vs mild DR) reported shorter DM duration, and had lower haemoglobin A1c, triglycerides and urine albumin/creatinine ratio (all p < 0.05). To date, we have extracted 41.8% (n = 1909) of the 12-month follow-up data. Of these, 99.7% (n = 1,904) did not progress to referable DR. Those who progressed to referable DR status (0.3%) had no DR at baseline.ConclusionsIn our prospective study of patients with T2DM and non-referable DR attending polyclinics, we found extremely low annual DR progression rates. These preliminary results suggest that extending screening intervals beyond 12 months may be viable and safe for most participants, although our 3-year follow up data are needed to substantiate this claim and develop the risk stratification model to identify low-risk patients with T2DM who can be assigned biennial or triennial screening intervals.

Project description:ObjectivesThe Australian Government funded a nationwide diabetic retinopathy screening programme to improve visual outcomes for people with diabetes. This study examined the benefits and barriers of the programme, image interpretation pathways and assessed the characteristics of people who had their fundus photos graded by a telereading service which was available as a part of the programme.DesignMultimethod: survey and retrospective review of referral forms.SettingTwenty-two primary healthcare facilities from urban, regional, rural and remote areas of Australia, and one telereading service operated by a referral-only eye clinic in metropolitan Sydney, Australia.ParticipantsTwenty-seven primary healthcare workers out of 110 contacted completed a survey, and 145 patient referrals were reviewed.ResultsManifest qualitative content analysis showed that primary healthcare workers reported that the benefits of the screening programme included improved patient outcomes and increased awareness and knowledge of diabetic retinopathy. Barriers related to staffing issues and limited referral pathways. Image grading was performed by a variety of primary healthcare workers, with one responder indicating the utilisation of a diabetic retinopathy reading service. Of the people with fundus photos graded by the reading service, 26.2% were reported to have diabetes. Overall, 12.3% of eyes were diagnosed with diabetic retinopathy. Photo quality was rated as excellent in 46.2% of photos. Referral to an optometrist for diabetic retinopathy was recommended in 4.1% of cases, and to an ophthalmologist in 6.9% of cases.ConclusionsThis nationwide diabetic retinopathy screening programme was perceived to increase access to diabetic retinopathy screening in regional, rural and remote areas of Australia. The telereading service has diagnosed diabetic retinopathy and other ocular pathologies in images it has received. Key barriers, such as access to ophthalmologists and optometrists, must be overcome to improve visual outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the accuracy of trained level 1 diabetic retinopathy (DR) graders (nurses, endocrinologists and one general practitioner), level 2 graders (midlevel ophthalmologists) and level 3 graders (senior ophthalmologists) in Vietnam against a reference standard from the UK and assess the impact of supplementary targeted grader training.DesignDiagnostic test accuracy study.SettingSecondary care hospitals in Southern Vietnam.ParticipantsDR training was delivered to Vietnamese graders in February 2018 by National Health Service (NHS) UK graders. Two-field retinal images (412 patient images) were graded by 14 trained graders in Vietnam between August and October 2018 and then regraded retrospectively by an NHS-certified reference standard UK optometrist (phase I). Further DR training based on phase I results was delivered to graders in November 2019. After training, a randomised subset of images from January to October 2020 (115 patient images) was graded by six of the original cohort (phase II). The reference grader regraded all images from phase I and II retrospectively in masked fashion.Primary and secondary outcome measuresSensitivity was calculated at the two different time points, and χ2 was used to test significance.ResultsIn phase I, the sensitivity for detecting any DR for all grader groups in Vietnam was low (41.8-42.2%) and improved in phase II after additional training was delivered (51.3-87.2%). The greatest improvement was seen among level 1 graders (p<0.001), and the lowest improvement was observed among level 3 graders (p=0.326). There was a statistically significant improvement in sensitivity for detecting referable DR and referable diabetic macular oedema between all grader levels. The post-training values ranged from 40.0 to 61.5% (including ungradable images) and 55.6%-90.0% (excluding ungradable images).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that targeted training interventions can improve accuracy of DR grading. These findings have important implications for improving service delivery in DR screening programmes in low-resource settings.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Interval cancers are primary breast cancers diagnosed in women after a negative screening test and before the next screening invitation. Our aim was to evaluate risk factors for interval cancer and their subtypes and to compare the risk factors identified with those associated with incident screen-detected cancers. METHODS: We analyzed data from 645,764 women participating in the Spanish breast cancer screening program from 2000-2006 and followed-up until 2009. A total of 5,309 screen-detected and 1,653 interval cancers were diagnosed. Among the latter, 1,012 could be classified on the basis of findings in screening and diagnostic mammograms, consisting of 489 true interval cancers (48.2%), 235 false-negatives (23.2%), 172 minimal-signs (17.2%) and 114 occult tumors (11.3%). Information on the screening protocol and women's characteristics were obtained from the screening program registry. Cause-specific Cox regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of risks factors for interval cancer and incident screen-detected cancer. A multinomial regression model, using screen-detected tumors as a reference group, was used to assess the effect of breast density and other factors on the occurrence of interval cancer subtypes. RESULTS: A previous false-positive was the main risk factor for interval cancer (HR?=?2.71, 95%CI: 2.28-3.23); this risk was higher for false-negatives (HR?=?8.79, 95%CI: 6.24-12.40) than for true interval cancer (HR?=?2.26, 95%CI: 1.59-3.21). A family history of breast cancer was associated with true intervals (HR?=?2.11, 95%CI: 1.60-2.78), previous benign biopsy with a false-negatives (HR?=?1.83, 95%CI: 1.23-2.71). High breast density was mainly associated with occult tumors (RRR?=?4.92, 95%CI: 2.58-9.38), followed by true intervals (RRR?=?1.67, 95%CI: 1.18-2.36) and false-negatives (RRR?=?1.58, 95%CI: 1.00-2.49). CONCLUSION: The role of women's characteristics differs among interval cancer subtypes. This information could be useful to improve effectiveness of breast cancer screening programmes and to better classify subgroups of women with different risks of developing cancer.