Barriers to Eye Care Among People Aged 40 Years and Older With Diagnosed Diabetes, 2006-2010

Bloomberg School of Public Health School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD (Sherrod).
Diabetes care (Impact Factor: 8.42). 09/2013; 37(1). DOI: 10.2337/dc13-1507
Source: PubMed


To examine barriers to receiving recommended eye care among people aged ≥40 years with diagnosed diabetes.Method
We analyzed 2006-2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 22 states (n=27,699). Respondents who had not sought eye care in the preceding 12 months were asked the main reason why. We categorized the reasons as cost/lack of insurance, no need, no eye doctor/travel/appointment, and other (meaning everything else). We used multinomial logistic regression to control for race/ethnicity, education, income, and other selected covariates.ResultsAmong adults with diagnosed diabetes, non-adherence to the recommended annual eye examinations was 23.5%. The most commonly reported reasons for not receiving eye care in the preceding 12 months were "no need" and "cost or lack of insurance" (39.7% and 32.3% respectively). Other reasons were no eye doctor, no transportation or could not get appointment" (6.4%), and "other" (21.5%). After controlling for covariates, adults aged 40-64 were more likely than those aged ≥65 years (relative risk ratios [RRR]=2.79; 95% CI =2.01, 3.89) and women were more likely than men (RRR=2.33; 95% CI=1.75, 3.14) to report "cost or lack of insurance" as their main reason. However, people aged 40-64 were less likely than those aged ≥65 years to report "no need" (RRR=0.51; 95% CI=0.39, 0.67) as their main reason.Conclusion
Addressing concerns about "cost or lack of insurance" for adults under 65 years and "no perceived need" among those 65 years and older could help improve eye care service utilization among people with diabetes.

Download full-text


Available from: John Crews, Oct 13, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To estimate the prevalence of, and factors associated with, dilated eye examination guideline compliance among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), but without diabetic retinopathy. Utilizing the computerized billing records database, we identified patients with International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 diagnoses of DM, but without any ocular diagnoses. The available medical records of patients in 2007-2008 were reviewed for demographic and ocular information, including visits through 2010 (n=200). Patients were considered guideline compliant if they returned at least every 15 months for screening. Participant street addresses were assigned latitude and longitude coordinates to assess their neighborhood socioeconomic status (using the 2000 US census data), distance to the screening facility, and public transportation access. Patients not compliant, based on the medical record review, were contacted by phone or mail and asked to complete a follow-up survey to determine if screening took place at other locations. The overall screening compliance rate was 31%. Patient sociodemographic characteristics, insurance status, and neighborhood socioeconomic measures were not significantly associated with compliance. However, in separate multivariable logistic regression models, those living eight or more miles from the screening facility were significantly less likely to be compliant relative to those living within eight miles (OR=0.36 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.86)), while public transit access quality was positively associated with screening compliance (1.34 (1.07 to 1.68)). Less than one-third of patients returned for diabetic retinopathy screening at least every 15 months, with transportation challenges associated with noncompliance. Our results suggest that reducing transportation barriers or utilizing community-based screening strategies may improve compliance.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose. To understand barriers facing high-risk individuals and to solicit the suggestions of these individuals, especially nonusers, on how to change the eye care delivery system to better meet their needs. Methods. Four focus groups were conducted. All discussion was audiotaped and transcribed. Content analysis was performed by the authors and with the assistance of qualitative software, NUD * IST Vivo. Results. The most frequently cited barriers include (1) cost, (2) trust, (3) communication, (4) clinic accessibility (transportation/distance), and (5) doctor-patient relationship. In underutilizers, trust was the most identified barrier to care. Suggestions on increasing educational opportunities/awareness of eye care and addressing cost and insurance issues as a means of improving trust and communications were most frequently offered, including using the Department of Social Services as a focal point for eye care education and assessment. Discussion. Trust is a major barrier to eye care, especially among underutilizers of disadvantaged populations. Increasing trust and eye care education at the community and individual levels is essential to increasing eye care utilization.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2014 · International Scholarly Research Notices
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Importance The use of a nonmydriatic camera for retinal imaging combined with the remote evaluation of images at a telemedicine reading center 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.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.Design, Setting, and Participants A cross-sectional study (Innovative Network for Sight [INSIGHT]) was conducted at 4 urban clinic or pharmacy settings in the United States serving predominantly ethnic/racial minority and uninsured persons with diabetes. Participants included persons aged 18 years or older who had type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus and presented to the community-based settings.Main Outcomes and Measures The percentage of DR detection, including type of DR, and the percentage of detection of other ocular findings.Results A total of 1894 persons participated in the INSIGHT screening program across sites, with 21.7% having DR in at least 1 eye. The most common type of DR was background DR, which was present in 94.1% of all participants with DR. Almost half (44.2%) of the sample screened had ocular findings other than DR; 30.7% of the other ocular findings were cataract.Conclusions and Relevance 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 vast majority of DR was background, indicating high public health potential for intervention in the earliest phases of DR when treatment can prevent vision loss. Other ocular conditions were detected at a high rate, a collateral benefit of DR screening programs that may be underappreciated.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2014 · Jama Ophthalmology
Show more