Cargando…
Prevailing clinical practices regarding screening for retinopathy of prematurity among pediatricians in India: A pilot survey
AIMS: To evaluate the prevailing practices for proper screening and referral scheme among Indian pediatricians for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pediatricians registered with Indian Academy of Pediatrics from six states of India were selected randomly and were telephonical...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3214411/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22011485 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.86307 |
Sumario: | AIMS: To evaluate the prevailing practices for proper screening and referral scheme among Indian pediatricians for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pediatricians registered with Indian Academy of Pediatrics from six states of India were selected randomly and were telephonically interviewed in accordance with a preformed questionnaire which comprised of questions regarding demographic factors, number of premature children seen per month, awareness and referral scheme to ophthalmologist; responses thus obtained were analyzed. RESULTS: Hundred percent knowledge about ROP and need for screening in premature babies was observed among the respondents. However, only 135 (58%) pediatricians always referred for ROP screening, 19 (8%) referred only sometimes and 80 (34%) did not refer at all. Consistent referral protocols taking into account all plausible risk factors for ROP were followed by only 25% of those who always referred. Major deterrent in ROP screening was perceived as non-availability of trained ophthalmologists. CONCLUSIONS: Only 14.5% of total pediatricians contacted were following international recommendations for ROP referral. Screening for ROP remains dismal as observed in this pilot survey as a consequence of non-availability of trained ophthalmologists as well as inconsistent screening guidelines. |
---|