Diabetic retinopathy screening: Perspectives of people with diabetes, screening intervals and costs of attending screening

Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, IMSCaR, College of Health and Behavioural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Diabetic Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.12). 03/2012; 29(7):878-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03637.x
Source: PubMed


To obtain the views of people with diabetes about the provision of diabetic retinopathy screening services; and the interval of screening.
Between October 2009 and January 2010, people with diabetes attending diabetic retinopathy screening clinics across Wales were asked to complete a questionnaire comprising of two parts: the first asking about their health, diabetes history, demographic characteristics and views about the diabetic retinopathy screening service, and the second asking about the costs of attending the screening.
The response rate was 40% (n = 621) from 1550 questionnaires distributed at diabetic retinopathy clinics, with 600 complete responses analysed. Respondents had a mean known duration of diabetes of 8.5 years (sd 7.8) and had attended for screening on average 3.2 times (sd 1.6) in the last 5 years. Sixty-eight per cent (n = 408) of respondents reported having their eyes screened approximately once a year. Eighty-five per cent (n = 507) felt that they should have their eyes screened every year. However, 65% (n = 390) of respondents would accept screening at 2- or 3-year intervals if medical evidence showed that it was safe. The reported personal costs incurred by respondents attending diabetic retinopathy screening were low.
Our study suggests that people with diabetes undergoing diabetic retinopathy screening would accept a greater screening interval, provided that adequate clinical evidence and medical reassurance were given.

Download full-text


Available from: Rebecca Thomas, Dec 16, 2013
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is accumulating evidence that the natural history of diabetic eye disease is sufficiently slow that 2-yearly retinal screening, or even longer, may be safe for some patients with diabetes. The information technology underpinning call-recall systems within screening programmes permits a more sophisticated approach to organizing retinal screening, as directed by the clinical evidence. This commentary explores the evidence for moving towards a biennial retinal screening programme for patients with Type 2 diabetes and diabetes duration of less than 10 years. © 2012 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2012 Diabetes UK.
    Preview · Article · Jul 2012 · Diabetic Medicine
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the major microvascular complications of diabetes. It is the most common cause of vision loss and blindness in the working-age people. This chapter firstly introduces DR pathological features and DR screening standards. The chapter then focuses on colour fundus image-based DR detection and DR screening using identification of morphological features. The chapter is also discussing the current progress of DR screening programmes based on colour fundus image grading and cost-effectiveness of DR screening programmes.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the association between socioeconomic factors and ophthalmic care services/visual impairment among patients with diabetes. Data from the Survey on Living with Chronic Disease in Canada (SLCDC)-Diabetes Component 2011 were used. A cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of patients with diabetes weighted to represent the civilian, noninstitutionalized Canadian population with self-reported type II diabetes. Socioeconomic factors were classified into predictive factors, need, and non-need factors. Factors associated with the ophthalmic care utilization and visual impairment were assessed using logistic regression models, weighted for the SLCDC sampling strategy. Among all patients with type II diabetes, factors associated with increased eye screening were: (i) discussion of diabetic complications with health professionals (odds ratio [OR] 2.02, 95% CI 1.28-3.19); (ii) having private insurance (OR 3.23, 95% CI 2.21-4.73); and (iii) duration of diabetes longer than 10 years (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04-2.25). Among asymptomatic patients (those who reported having no visual impairment), patients with lower income had 40% decreased odds of having eye screening services compared with those with higher income (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.98). Among all patients with type II diabetes, visual impairment was more likely in females (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.09), older patients (OR 18.12, 95% CI 6.63-49.51), and those with poor self-rated health (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.62-5.96). Our study found that interactions between health professionals and patients, as well as having private health insurance, were the main factors associated with ophthalmic resource utilization, whereas age, sex, duration of diabetes, and self-rated health were associated with visual impairment in patients with type II diabetes. Copyright © 2015 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2015 · Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology