Presentation on theme: "Copyright restrictions may apply JAMA Ophthalmology Journal Club Slides: Diabetes Eye Screening in Minority Populations Owsley C, McGwin G Jr, Lee DJ,"— Presentation transcript:
Copyright restrictions may apply JAMA Ophthalmology Journal Club Slides: Diabetes Eye Screening in Minority Populations Owsley C, McGwin G Jr, Lee DJ, et al; Innovative Network for Sight (INSIGHT) Research Group. Diabetes eye screening in urban settings serving minority populations: detection of diabetic retinopathy and other ocular findings using telemedicine. JAMA Ophthalmol. Published online November 13, 2014. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.4652.
Copyright restrictions may apply Introduction Use of a nonmydriatic retinal imaging camera plus evaluation of images through telemedicine has been advanced as a strategy for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening. –Particularly among patients with diabetes mellitus from ethnic/racial minority populations with low utilization of eye care. Prior research indicates that DR screening programs are associated with: –Lower rate of those with sight-threatening DR detected at subsequent screenings. –Lower incidence and prevalence of blindness in people with diabetes. Objective: To examine the rate and types of DR identified through a telemedicine screening program using a nonmydriatic camera, as well as the rate of other ocular findings.
Copyright restrictions may apply Study Design: Cross-sectional study at 4 urban clinic or pharmacy settings in the United States serving predominantly ethnic/racial minority populations and uninsured persons with diabetes mellitus. Participants: Persons aged ≥18 years who had type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus presenting to the community-based settings. Data Analysis: Main outcomes were percentage of DR detection by type and percentage of detection of other ocular findings. Analysis of variance and χ 2 tests were used to compare continuous and categorical data, respectively, across groups. Limitations: Unknown whether those who participated were systematically different from those who did not; information unavailable on percentage of persons who declined participation. Methods
Copyright restrictions may apply Total of 1894 persons participated in the screening program across sites, with 21.7% having DR in at least 1 eye. The 3 sites that were clinics (Birmingham, Alabama; Miami, Florida; Winston-Salem, North Carolina) had similar rates of DR (23.5%-24.3%), whereas the site that was a pharmacy (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) had a lower rate (15.8%). Most common type of DR was background DR, which was present in 94.1% of all participants with DR. Participants with DR had a longer duration of diabetes than did those without DR (mean, 13.7 vs 8.8 years; P <.001). Almost half of the participants (44.2%) had ocular findings other than DR; 30.7% of other ocular findings were cataract. Results
Copyright restrictions may apply Percentage of the sample with various levels of diabetic retinopathy in either eye stratified by site and overall. Results
Copyright restrictions may apply Results Number and Percentage of Patients With Other Ocular Findings
Copyright restrictions may apply In a DR telemedicine screening program in urban clinic or pharmacy settings in the United States serving predominantly ethnic/racial minority populations, DR was identified on screening in approximately 1 in 5 persons with diabetes. The pharmacy setting had a lower DR rate than that of the clinics, an issue for further study and clarification. The vast majority of DR was background DR, indicating high public health potential for intervention in the earliest phases of DR when treatment can prevent vision loss. That DR was more likely to be present in persons with longer durations of diabetes underscores the importance for screening programs to target individuals with long-standing diabetes. Comment
Copyright restrictions may apply Other ocular findings were detected at a high rate, in almost half of the persons screened. These findings other than DR included cataract, glaucoma, and age-related macular degeneration, all of which are sight-threatening and treatable conditions. The detection of other ocular findings may be a potentially underappreciated feature of DR screening programs for preventing vision loss. Comment
Copyright restrictions may apply If you have questions, please contact the corresponding author: –Cynthia Owsley, PhD, Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 700 S 18th St, Ste 609, Birmingham, AL 35294 (firstname.lastname@example.org). Funding/Support This research was supported through Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cooperative agreements with The Johns Hopkins University, University of Alabama at Birmingham, University of Miami, and Wills Eye Hospital (5U58DP002651, 5U58DP002652, 5U58DP002653, 5U58DP002655). The grantees received additional support directly from Alcon Research Institute (The Johns Hopkins University) and from the EyeSight Foundation of Alabama, Research to Prevent Blindness, and the Buck Trust (University of Alabama at Birmingham). Nidek provided the cameras and operator training free of charge. Conflict of Interest Disclosures Dr Friedman has consulted for Nidek Inc about devices unrelated to this project. No other disclosures were reported. Contact Information