Follow-up Adherence After Teleretinal Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy.

Q3 Medicine
International Ophthalmology Clinics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-23 DOI:10.1097/IIO.0000000000000540
Paul D Chamberlain, Rishabh C Date, Kevin L Shen, Giovanni A Campagna, Linda B Piller, Yvonne I Chu, Christina Y Weng
{"title":"Follow-up Adherence After Teleretinal Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy.","authors":"Paul D Chamberlain, Rishabh C Date, Kevin L Shen, Giovanni A Campagna, Linda B Piller, Yvonne I Chu, Christina Y Weng","doi":"10.1097/IIO.0000000000000540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Determine the follow-up rate for patients referred following an abnormal teleretinal imaging (TRI) screening and examine patient characteristics predictive of follow-up nonadherence.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study of patients screened between August 2014 and July 2016 in the Harris Health System (HHS) in Houston, TX. All diabetic patients referred for in-person examination, who had data for all study variables, and who did not have established ophthalmic care in the HHS within the previous 2 years were included. Data collected included TRI findings, clinic location, age, race, gender, hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), and insulin use. The primary outcome was whether or not a patient attended an in-person follow-up visit. Attendance was the dependent variable in a multivariable logistic regression with the aforementioned exposures used as independent variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 1695 patients included in the study. The follow-up rate (ie, the percentage of patients who went for an in-person examination with an ophthalmologist following a positive screening test and referral) was 54.9%. TRI findings of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) + referable diabetic macular edema (DME) predicted poorer compliance with follow-up recommendations compared to patients with PDR alone (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99; P=0.046). Age, race, gender, glycemic control, and insulin use did not predict compliance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Age, race, gender, glycemic control, and insulin use were not found to be predictive of follow-up compliance rates; the most severe disease (PDR + DME) predicted noncompliance. Diabetic retinopathy screening programs may consider more aggressive measures in emphasizing compliance in patients with the worst disease as these patients are more likely to miss follow-up appointments. More studies are needed to characterize risk factors for noncompliance.</p>","PeriodicalId":14338,"journal":{"name":"International Ophthalmology Clinics","volume":"65 1","pages":"35-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Ophthalmology Clinics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IIO.0000000000000540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Determine the follow-up rate for patients referred following an abnormal teleretinal imaging (TRI) screening and examine patient characteristics predictive of follow-up nonadherence.

Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study of patients screened between August 2014 and July 2016 in the Harris Health System (HHS) in Houston, TX. All diabetic patients referred for in-person examination, who had data for all study variables, and who did not have established ophthalmic care in the HHS within the previous 2 years were included. Data collected included TRI findings, clinic location, age, race, gender, hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), and insulin use. The primary outcome was whether or not a patient attended an in-person follow-up visit. Attendance was the dependent variable in a multivariable logistic regression with the aforementioned exposures used as independent variables.

Results: There were 1695 patients included in the study. The follow-up rate (ie, the percentage of patients who went for an in-person examination with an ophthalmologist following a positive screening test and referral) was 54.9%. TRI findings of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) + referable diabetic macular edema (DME) predicted poorer compliance with follow-up recommendations compared to patients with PDR alone (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99; P=0.046). Age, race, gender, glycemic control, and insulin use did not predict compliance.

Conclusion: Age, race, gender, glycemic control, and insulin use were not found to be predictive of follow-up compliance rates; the most severe disease (PDR + DME) predicted noncompliance. Diabetic retinopathy screening programs may consider more aggressive measures in emphasizing compliance in patients with the worst disease as these patients are more likely to miss follow-up appointments. More studies are needed to characterize risk factors for noncompliance.

糖尿病视网膜病变远网膜筛查后的随访依从性。
目的:确定在异常远端视网膜成像(TRI)筛查后转诊的患者的随访率,并检查预测随访不依从的患者特征。材料和方法:对2014年8月至2016年7月在德克萨斯州休斯顿的哈里斯卫生系统(HHS)筛选的患者进行横断面研究。所有接受亲自检查的糖尿病患者,所有研究变量的数据,以及在过去2年内没有在HHS建立眼科护理的患者都被纳入研究。收集的数据包括TRI结果、诊所位置、年龄、种族、性别、血红蛋白A1C (HbA1c)和胰岛素使用情况。主要结果是患者是否参加了亲自随访。出席率是多变量逻辑回归的因变量,上述暴露用作自变量。结果:共纳入1695例患者。随访率(即在筛查结果呈阳性并转诊后接受眼科医生亲自检查的患者百分比)为54.9%。增生性糖尿病视网膜病变(PDR) +糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)的TRI结果与单独PDR患者相比,预测随访建议的依从性较差(OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99;P = 0.046)。年龄、种族、性别、血糖控制和胰岛素使用不能预测依从性。结论:年龄、种族、性别、血糖控制和胰岛素使用不能预测随访依从率;最严重疾病(PDR + DME)预测不合规。糖尿病视网膜病变筛查项目可以考虑采取更积极的措施,强调患有最严重疾病的患者的依从性,因为这些患者更有可能错过随访预约。需要更多的研究来确定不遵守规定的危险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Ophthalmology Clinics
International Ophthalmology Clinics Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
期刊介绍: International Ophthalmology Clinics is a valuable resource for any medical professional seeking to stay informed and up-to-date regarding developments in this dynamic specialty. Each issue of this quarterly publication presents a comprehensive review of a single topic in a new or changing area of ophthalmology. The timely, tightly focused review articles found in this publication give ophthalmologists the opportunity to benefit from the knowledge of leading experts in this rapidly changing field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信