Differences in attitudes towards retinopathy of prematurity screening programs among neonatologists and ophthalmologists in Taiwan.

Abstract

Background/purpose: In this study, we aimed to understand the discrepancies between neonatologists and ophthalmologists in Taiwan regarding their attitudes toward screening programs involving retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and other available options.

Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional online survey coded with SurveyCake. Responses were collected in July and August 2023. The participants were neonatologists and ophthalmologists who actively participated in preterm infant care and ROP screening. We used a 4-point Likert scale to gauge the confidence levels of program sensitivity and specificity. Inter-specialty comparisons were conducted using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests.

Results: A total of 68 individuals completed the survey (37 neonatologists and 31 ophthalmologists). The most frequently reported criteria for screening were ≤32 weeks of gestational age and ≤1500 g birth weight. Additionally, 62 participants included a subjective criterion to screen infants deemed at high risk for ROP by neonatologists. Neonatologists were more concerned about the sensitivities in detecting treatment-requiring ROP of their current criteria (27% vs 3%, p = 0.007). In contrast, ophthalmologists were more concerned about the specificity of their current screening criteria (35% vs 65%, p = 0.005). More ophthalmologists (35% vs 71%, p = 0.003) were familiar with modern objective screening programs such as the WINROP and G-ROP models; however, few in both specialties had incorporated such models in their routine practice. Fifty-two participants sought local validation before implementing new programs.

Conclusion: Differences between ophthalmologists' and neonatologists' attitudes toward ROP screening models exist. Developing a new screening program with objective criteria and locally validated could bridge these gaps.