The implementation of artificial intelligence driven diabetic retinopathy screening in a district hospital in Myanmar: a pilot study

Mya Wut Yee Soe , Jasmine Ge , Kan Htoo Aung , Su Mon La , Anna CS Tan
{"title":"The implementation of artificial intelligence driven diabetic retinopathy screening in a district hospital in Myanmar: a pilot study","authors":"Mya Wut Yee Soe ,&nbsp;Jasmine Ge ,&nbsp;Kan Htoo Aung ,&nbsp;Su Mon La ,&nbsp;Anna CS Tan","doi":"10.1016/j.ajoint.2025.100149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Diabetic retinopathy (DR) causes irreversible blindness. Early detection and timely treatment can prevent blindness. However, manpower and access to DR screening is challenging in remote areas. This study aims to validate and assess the acceptability of artificial intelligence assisted diabetic retinopathy screening (AI-DRS) versus standard care (SC) with slit lamp examination.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This was a cross sectional, comparative cohort study.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>All patients underwent a mydriatic two-field fundus photography, automatically analyzed by the AI and a dilated clinical fundus examination by a consultant ophthalmologist, blinded to the AI-DRS results. The primary outcome measure was the agreement between AI-DRS (Singapore Eye Lesion Analyzer (SELENA+) performed with a portable fundus camera) and SC, measured by sensitivity, specificity and kappa indices. Questionnaires were administered to test acceptability of AI-DRS.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>414 eyes of 207 patients (mean age 60.13, SD=9.39), male (20.3 %) and female (79.7 %) were screened. AI-DRS versus SC had a sensitivity of 85 % and specificity of 100 % with high agreement (kappa value 0.915 (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001)). Comparing AI-DRS versus SC, 350 versus 362 eyes had no DR/mild DR, 6 versus 7 eyes had moderate/severe non-proliferative DR(NPDR), 6 versus 7 had proliferative DR(PDR). AI-DRS had more ungradable eyes versus SC (52 versus 39 eyes). Questionnaires showed 98.6 % of patients found AI-DRS acceptable.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The AI-DRS is a valid method of DR screening in suburban Myanmar populations with high rates of acceptability, may improve access and coverage of DR screening services for Myanmar and in other similar settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100071,"journal":{"name":"AJO International","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJO International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253525000528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) causes irreversible blindness. Early detection and timely treatment can prevent blindness. However, manpower and access to DR screening is challenging in remote areas. This study aims to validate and assess the acceptability of artificial intelligence assisted diabetic retinopathy screening (AI-DRS) versus standard care (SC) with slit lamp examination.

Design

This was a cross sectional, comparative cohort study.

Methods

All patients underwent a mydriatic two-field fundus photography, automatically analyzed by the AI and a dilated clinical fundus examination by a consultant ophthalmologist, blinded to the AI-DRS results. The primary outcome measure was the agreement between AI-DRS (Singapore Eye Lesion Analyzer (SELENA+) performed with a portable fundus camera) and SC, measured by sensitivity, specificity and kappa indices. Questionnaires were administered to test acceptability of AI-DRS.

Results

414 eyes of 207 patients (mean age 60.13, SD=9.39), male (20.3 %) and female (79.7 %) were screened. AI-DRS versus SC had a sensitivity of 85 % and specificity of 100 % with high agreement (kappa value 0.915 (p < 0.001)). Comparing AI-DRS versus SC, 350 versus 362 eyes had no DR/mild DR, 6 versus 7 eyes had moderate/severe non-proliferative DR(NPDR), 6 versus 7 had proliferative DR(PDR). AI-DRS had more ungradable eyes versus SC (52 versus 39 eyes). Questionnaires showed 98.6 % of patients found AI-DRS acceptable.

Conclusion

The AI-DRS is a valid method of DR screening in suburban Myanmar populations with high rates of acceptability, may improve access and coverage of DR screening services for Myanmar and in other similar settings.
人工智能驱动的糖尿病视网膜病变筛查在缅甸某地区医院的实施:一项试点研究
目的:糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)可导致不可逆的失明。早期发现和及时治疗可以预防失明。然而,在偏远地区,人力和获得DR筛查是一项挑战。本研究旨在验证和评估人工智能辅助糖尿病视网膜病变筛查(AI-DRS)与裂隙灯检查标准护理(SC)的可接受性。这是一项横断面、比较队列研究。方法所有患者均行双视野眼底摄影,人工智能自动分析,眼科顾问医师进行扩大眼底检查,对人工智能- drs结果不知情。主要结局指标是AI-DRS(新加坡眼病变分析仪(SELENA+))和SC之间的一致性,通过灵敏度、特异性和kappa指数来衡量。通过问卷调查来测试AI-DRS的可接受性。结果共筛查患者207例414只眼,平均年龄60.13岁,SD=9.39,男性占20.3%,女性占79.7%。AI-DRS与SC的敏感性为85%,特异性为100%,一致性高(kappa值0.915 (p <;0.001))。将AI-DRS与SC进行比较,350对362只眼无DR/轻度DR, 6对7只眼有中度/重度非增殖性DR(NPDR), 6对7只眼有增殖性DR(PDR)。与SC相比,AI-DRS有更多的无法分级的眼睛(52对39)。问卷调查显示98.6%的患者认为AI-DRS是可以接受的。结论AI-DRS是缅甸郊区人群DR筛查的有效方法,可接受度高,可提高缅甸及其他类似地区DR筛查服务的可及性和覆盖率。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信