Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera

PURPOSE: To compare the results obtained by two screening techniques for diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: Patients were assessed in two groups, according to whether the retinal images were analyzed by the general practitioner (Group 1) or by the ophthalmologist (Group 2) in a two-year prospective stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Romero-Aroca, Pedro, Sagarra-Alamo, Ramon, Basora-Gallisa, Josep, Basora-Gallisa, Teresa, Baget-Bernaldiz, Marc, Bautista-Perez, Angel
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3009995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191444
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S14521
_version_ 1782194758478725120
author Romero-Aroca, Pedro
Sagarra-Alamo, Ramon
Basora-Gallisa, Josep
Basora-Gallisa, Teresa
Baget-Bernaldiz, Marc
Bautista-Perez, Angel
author_facet Romero-Aroca, Pedro
Sagarra-Alamo, Ramon
Basora-Gallisa, Josep
Basora-Gallisa, Teresa
Baget-Bernaldiz, Marc
Bautista-Perez, Angel
author_sort Romero-Aroca, Pedro
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the results obtained by two screening techniques for diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: Patients were assessed in two groups, according to whether the retinal images were analyzed by the general practitioner (Group 1) or by the ophthalmologist (Group 2) in a two-year prospective study using telemedicine. RESULTS: The number of patients referred to the nonmydriatic fundus camera unit was higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (63.80% versus 17.63%). Greater patient adherence was observed in Group 1 than in Group 2 when patients came to retinography (98.25% versus 87.52%). There were no significant differences in other technique variables. The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy was similar in both groups (8.98% in Group 1 and 9.16% in Group 2), but the prevalence of severe proliferative diabetic retinopathy was higher in Group 2 (1.69% [severe] and 0.45% [proliferative]) than in Group 1 (1.01% and 0.11%, respectively). Diabetic macular edema was more prevalent in Group 2 (2.03%). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of general practitioners in the screening method seems to be important. A great number of patients with diabetes mellitus were screened, and a higher percentage of patients with diabetic retinopathy or macular edema were detected.
format Text
id pubmed-3009995
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30099952010-12-29 Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera Romero-Aroca, Pedro Sagarra-Alamo, Ramon Basora-Gallisa, Josep Basora-Gallisa, Teresa Baget-Bernaldiz, Marc Bautista-Perez, Angel Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To compare the results obtained by two screening techniques for diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: Patients were assessed in two groups, according to whether the retinal images were analyzed by the general practitioner (Group 1) or by the ophthalmologist (Group 2) in a two-year prospective study using telemedicine. RESULTS: The number of patients referred to the nonmydriatic fundus camera unit was higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (63.80% versus 17.63%). Greater patient adherence was observed in Group 1 than in Group 2 when patients came to retinography (98.25% versus 87.52%). There were no significant differences in other technique variables. The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy was similar in both groups (8.98% in Group 1 and 9.16% in Group 2), but the prevalence of severe proliferative diabetic retinopathy was higher in Group 2 (1.69% [severe] and 0.45% [proliferative]) than in Group 1 (1.01% and 0.11%, respectively). Diabetic macular edema was more prevalent in Group 2 (2.03%). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of general practitioners in the screening method seems to be important. A great number of patients with diabetes mellitus were screened, and a higher percentage of patients with diabetic retinopathy or macular edema were detected. Dove Medical Press 2010 2010-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3009995/ /pubmed/21191444 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S14521 Text en © 2010 Romero-Aroca et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Romero-Aroca, Pedro
Sagarra-Alamo, Ramon
Basora-Gallisa, Josep
Basora-Gallisa, Teresa
Baget-Bernaldiz, Marc
Bautista-Perez, Angel
Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title_full Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title_fullStr Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title_full_unstemmed Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title_short Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
title_sort prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3009995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191444
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S14521
work_keys_str_mv AT romeroarocapedro prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera
AT sagarraalamoramon prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera
AT basoragallisajosep prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera
AT basoragallisateresa prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera
AT bagetbernaldizmarc prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera
AT bautistaperezangel prospectivecomparisonoftwomethodsofscreeningfordiabeticretinopathybynonmydriaticfunduscamera