Dataset Information

Predictive value of screening tests for visually significant eye disease.

ABSTRACT: To determine the predictive value of ophthalmic screening tests with visually significant eye disease in a cohort of American Indian/Alaskan Natives from the Pacific Northwest.Validity assessment of a possible screening protocol.Ophthalmic technicians performed a screening examination including medical and ocular history, best-corrected visual acuity, limbal anterior chamber depth assessment, frequency-doubling technology perimetry (FDT, C-20-5), confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy, nonmydriatic digital photography, and tonometry on 429 participants. An ophthalmologist performed a comprehensive eye examination on subjects with 1 or more abnormal screening tests and a random selection of those with normal screening tests. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to determine the association between abnormal screening test results and visually significant eye disease. We also determined the predictive value of screening tests with ocular disease.Univariate analysis identified history of eye disease or diabetes mellitus (P < .001), visual acuity <20/40 (P < .001), abnormal/poor-quality confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (P < .001), abnormal FDT (P < .001), and abnormal/poor-quality nonmydriatic imaging (P < .001) as associated with visually significant eye disease. A multivariate analysis found visually significant eye disease to be associated (P < .001; receiver operating characteristic curve area = 0.827, negative predictive value = 84%) with 4 screening tests: visual acuity <20/40, abnormal/poor-quality nonmydriatic imaging, abnormal FDT, and abnormal/poor-quality confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy.Ophthalmic technicians performing a subset of screening tests may provide an accurate and efficient means of screening for eye disease in an American Indian/Alaskan Native population. Confirmation of these results in other populations, particularly those with a different profile of disease prevalence, is needed.

SUBMITTER: Kopplin LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5520795 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Predictive value of screening tests for visually significant eye disease.

Kopplin Laura J LJ Mansberger Steven L SL

American journal of ophthalmology 20150604 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine the predictive value of ophthalmic screening tests with visually significant eye disease in a cohort of American Indian/Alaskan Natives from the Pacific Northwest.<h4>Design</h4>Validity assessment of a possible screening protocol.<h4>Methods</h4>Ophthalmic technicians performed a screening examination including medical and ocular history, best-corrected visual acuity, limbal anterior chamber depth assessment, frequency-doubling technology perimetry (FDT, C-20-5), co ...[more]

PMID: 26052087

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGeriatric ground level fall is a common admission diagnosis for trauma centers in the United States. Visual health has been linked to fall risk reduction in older adult but is rarely fully evaluated during a trauma admission. Using a commercial application and a questionnaire, we developed and tested a trauma provider eye examination (TPEE) to screen visual health. This study used the TPEE to (1) evaluate the prevalence of undiagnosed or undertreated visual disease in geriatric trauma patients and (2) determine the feasibility and reliability of the TPEE to screen for vision disease.MethodsThis prospective study included patients older than 60 years evaluated by the trauma service from June 2019 to May 2020. Patients with ocular or globe trauma were excluded. The primary outcome was significant abnormal vision (SAV) found using the TPEE. Ophthalmology performed a dilated examination as the criterion standard for comparison. We assessed the feasibility and reliability of the TPEE. Fisher's exact test and logistic model were used in the data analysis.ResultsEnrollment concluded with 96 patients. Mean age was 75 years, and fall (79%) was the most common mechanism of injury. Significant abnormal vision was common: undiagnosed disease was found in 39% and undertreated in 14%. Trauma provider examination was 94% sensitive and 92% specific for SAV cases. Congruence between TPEE and ophthalmology examination was highest in pupil examination (86%), visual fields (58%), and Amsler grid (52%). Multivariate analysis found that a combination of an abnormal Amsler test and abnormal visual field defect was significantly associated with SAV (odds ratio, 4.1; p = 0.03).ConclusionTrauma provider eye examination screening can identify patients with visual deficits. Given the association between visual deficits and fall risk, older adults may benefit from such a screening or a formal ophthalmology referral.Level of evidenceTherapeutic/Care Management, level II.

Project description:ImportanceEfforts to reduce low-value tests and treatments in primary care are often ineffective. These efforts typically target physicians broadly, most of whom order low-value care infrequently.ObjectivesTo measure physician-level use rates of 4 low-value screening tests in primary care to investigate the presence and characteristics of primary care physicians who frequently order low-value care.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative health care claims collected between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, in Ontario, Canada. This study measured use of 4 low-value screening tests-repeated dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, electrocardiograms (ECGs), Papanicolaou (Pap) tests, and chest radiographs (CXRs)-among low-risk outpatients rostered to a common cohort of primary care physicians.ExposuresPhysician sex, years since medical school graduation, and primary care model.Main outcomes and measuresThis study measured the number of tests to which a given physician ranked in the top quintile by ordering rate. The resulting cross-test score (range, 0-4) reflects a physician's propensity to order low-value care across screening tests. Physicians were then dichotomized into infrequent or isolated frequent users (score, 0 or 1, respectively) or generalized frequent users for 2 or more tests (score, ≥2).ResultsThe final sample consisted of 2394 primary care physicians (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [10.0] years; 50.2% female), who were predominantly Canadian medical school graduates (1701 [71.1%]), far removed from medical school graduation (median, 25.3 years; interquartile range, 17.3-32.3 years), and reimbursed via fee-for-service in a family health group (1130 [47.2%]). They ordered 302 509 low-value screening tests (74 167 DXA scans, 179 855 ECGs, 19 906 Pap tests, and 28 581 CXRs) after 3 428 557 ordering opportunities. Within the cohort, generalized frequent users represented 18.4% (441 of 2394) of physicians but ordered 39.2% (118 665 of 302 509) of all low-value screening tests. Physicians who were male (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.64), further removed from medical school graduation (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04), or in an enhanced fee-for-service payment model (family health group) vs a capitated payment model (family health team) (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.42-2.94) had increased odds of being generalized frequent users.Conclusions and relevanceThis study identified a group of primary care physicians who frequently ordered low-value screening tests. Tailoring future interventions to these generalized frequent users might be an effective approach to reducing low-value care.

Dataset Information

Predictive value of screening tests for visually significant eye disease.

Publications

Predictive value of screening tests for visually significant eye disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets