Cargando…
Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review
To determine whether the recommended screening interval for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the UK can safely be extended beyond 1 year. Systematic review of clinical and cost-effectiveness studies. Nine databases were searched with no date restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort stud...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4717369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25586713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305938 |
_version_ | 1782410642639028224 |
---|---|
author | Taylor-Phillips, Sian Mistry, Hema Leslie, Rachael Todkill, Dan Tsertsvadze, Alexander Connock, Martin Clarke, Aileen |
author_facet | Taylor-Phillips, Sian Mistry, Hema Leslie, Rachael Todkill, Dan Tsertsvadze, Alexander Connock, Martin Clarke, Aileen |
author_sort | Taylor-Phillips, Sian |
collection | PubMed |
description | To determine whether the recommended screening interval for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the UK can safely be extended beyond 1 year. Systematic review of clinical and cost-effectiveness studies. Nine databases were searched with no date restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, prognostic or economic modelling studies which described the incidence and progression of DR in populations with type 1 diabetes mellitus or type 2 diabetes mellitus of either sex and of any age reporting incidence and progression of DR in relation to screening interval (vs annual screening interval) and/or prognostic factors were included. Narrative synthesis was undertaken. 14 013 papers were identified, of which 11 observational studies, 5 risk stratification modelling studies and 9 economic studies were included. Data were available for 262 541 patients of whom at least 228 649 (87%) had type 2 diabetes. There were no RCTs. Studies concluded that there is little difference between clinical outcomes from screening 1 yearly or 2 yearly in low-risk patients. However there was high loss to follow-up (13–31%), heterogeneity in definitions of low risk and variation in screening and grading protocols for prior retinopathy results. Observational and economic modelling studies in low-risk patients show little difference in clinical outcomes between 1-year and 2-year screening intervals. The lack of experimental research designs and heterogeneity in definition of low risk considerably limits the reliability and validity of this conclusion. Cost-effectiveness findings were mixed. There is insufficient evidence to recommend a move to extend the screening interval beyond 1 year. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4717369 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47173692016-01-28 Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review Taylor-Phillips, Sian Mistry, Hema Leslie, Rachael Todkill, Dan Tsertsvadze, Alexander Connock, Martin Clarke, Aileen Br J Ophthalmol Systematic Review To determine whether the recommended screening interval for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the UK can safely be extended beyond 1 year. Systematic review of clinical and cost-effectiveness studies. Nine databases were searched with no date restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, prognostic or economic modelling studies which described the incidence and progression of DR in populations with type 1 diabetes mellitus or type 2 diabetes mellitus of either sex and of any age reporting incidence and progression of DR in relation to screening interval (vs annual screening interval) and/or prognostic factors were included. Narrative synthesis was undertaken. 14 013 papers were identified, of which 11 observational studies, 5 risk stratification modelling studies and 9 economic studies were included. Data were available for 262 541 patients of whom at least 228 649 (87%) had type 2 diabetes. There were no RCTs. Studies concluded that there is little difference between clinical outcomes from screening 1 yearly or 2 yearly in low-risk patients. However there was high loss to follow-up (13–31%), heterogeneity in definitions of low risk and variation in screening and grading protocols for prior retinopathy results. Observational and economic modelling studies in low-risk patients show little difference in clinical outcomes between 1-year and 2-year screening intervals. The lack of experimental research designs and heterogeneity in definition of low risk considerably limits the reliability and validity of this conclusion. Cost-effectiveness findings were mixed. There is insufficient evidence to recommend a move to extend the screening interval beyond 1 year. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-01 2015-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4717369/ /pubmed/25586713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305938 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Taylor-Phillips, Sian Mistry, Hema Leslie, Rachael Todkill, Dan Tsertsvadze, Alexander Connock, Martin Clarke, Aileen Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title | Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title_full | Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title_fullStr | Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title_short | Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
title_sort | extending the diabetic retinopathy screening interval beyond 1 year: systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4717369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25586713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305938 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT taylorphillipssian extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT mistryhema extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT leslierachael extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT todkilldan extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT tsertsvadzealexander extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT connockmartin extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview AT clarkeaileen extendingthediabeticretinopathyscreeningintervalbeyond1yearsystematicreview |