Early diagnosis and management of the ever-increasing global consequences of diabetes is of concern to all nations. The populations of developing countries in particular, account for about 75% of the estimated total number of those afflicted. The Middle East and North Africa Region have around 35.4 (24.3-47.4) million diabetics with a prevalence of around 10.5% in the Middle East. A high proportion of these are undiagnosed. The aim of this study was to assess the awareness of and knowledge about the ocular impacts of diabetes as diabetic retinopathy (DR) in Jordanians by comparing those with and those without diabetes.

In this cross-sectional study, diabetic and non-diabetic patients attending different clinics at the National Center for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Genetics (NCDEG) were interviewed face-to-face using a questionnaire, to assess the level of knowledge about diabetic retinopathy (DR). The questionnaire was assessed beforehand by ophthalmologists from the School of Medicine, the University of Jordan, in Amman Results: A total of 214 subjects participated in this study (108 males:106 females). The mean age was 58.2 ± 10.6 years; (28 to 88 years) ~70% were diabetic. More than 98% were aware that diabetes can have ocular consequences. Only 17.3% however, had an adequate knowledge of DR. Around 40% did not know the treatment options although 75.7% of the diabetics carried out regular blood sugar checks in <6 months, and 73.4% had their last eye checkups in

CONCLUSIONS

The participants in this study had good awareness of DR but their knowledge of this ocular condition and treatment options is limited. Health-education programs and awareness campaigns should be initiated at health and eye care centers. Enrichment of social media and internet websites with evidence-based information by medical professionals are promising options for upgrading knowledge about this common global cause of blindness.

Collapse

To determine agreement of one-field (1F, macula-centred), two-field (2F, disc-macula) and five-field (5F, macula, disc, superior, inferior and nasal) mydriatic handheld retinal imaging protocols for the assessment of diabetic retinopathy (DR) as compared with standard seven-field Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) photography.

Prospective, comparative instrument validation study. Mydriatic retinal images were taken using three handheld retinal cameras: Aurora (AU; 50° field of view (FOV), 5F), Smartscope (SS; 40° FOV, 5F), and RetinaVue (RV; 60° FOV, 2F) followed by ETDRS photography. Images were evaluated at a centralised reading centre using the international DR classification. Each field protocol (1F, 2F and 5F) was graded independently by masked graders. Weighted kappa (Kw) statistics assessed agreement for DR. Sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) for referable diabetic retinopathy (refDR; moderate non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or worse, or ungradable images) were calculated.

Images from 225 eyes of 116 patients with diabetes were evaluated. Severity by ETDRS photography: no DR, 33.3%; mild NPDR, 20.4%; moderate, 14.2%; severe, 11.6%; proliferative, 20.4%. Ungradable rate for DR: ETDRS, 0%; AU: 1F 2.23%, 2F 1.79%, 5F 0%; SS: 1F 7.6%, 2F 4.0%, 5F 3.6%; RV: 1F 6.7%, 2F 5.8%. Agreement rates of DR grading between handheld retinal imaging and ETDRS photography were (Kw, SN/SP refDR) AU: 1F 0.54, 0.72/0.92; 2F 0.59, 0.74/0.92; 5F 0.75, 0.86/0.97; SS: 1F 0.51, 0.72/0.92; 2F 0.60, 0.75/0.92; 5F 0.73, 0.88/0.92; RV: 1F 0.77, 0.91/0.95; 2F 0.75, 0.87/0.95.

When using handheld devices, the addition of peripheral fields decreased the ungradable rate and increased SN and SP for refDR. These data suggest the benefit of additional peripheral fields in DR screening programmes that use handheld retinal imaging.

Early screening and accurate staging of diabetic retinopathy (DR) can reduce blindness risk in type 2 diabetes patients. DR's complex pathogenesis involves many factors, making ophthalmologist screening alone insufficient for prevention and treatment. Often, endocrinologists are the first to see diabetic patients and thus should screen for retinopathy for early intervention.

To explore the efficacy of non-mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP)-enhanced telemedicine in assessing DR and its various stages.

This retrospective study incorporated findings from an analysis of 93 diabetic patients, examining both NMFP-assisted telemedicine and fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA). It focused on assessing the concordance in DR detection between these two methodologies. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the optimal sensitivity and specificity of NMFP-assisted telemedicine, using FFA outcomes as the standard benchmark.

In the context of DR diagnosis and staging, the kappa coefficients for NMFP-assisted telemedicine and FFA were recorded at 0.775 and 0.689 respectively, indicating substantial intermethod agreement. Moreover, the NMFP-assisted telemedicine's predictive accuracy for positive FFA outcomes, as denoted by the area under the ROC curve, was remarkably high at 0.955, within a confidence interval of 0.914 to 0.995 and a statistically significant P-value of less than 0.001. This predictive model exhibited a specificity of 100%, a sensitivity of 90.9%, and a Youden index of 0.909.

NMFP-assisted telemedicine represents a pragmatic, objective, and precise modality for fundus examination, particularly applicable in the context of endocrinology inpatient care and primary healthcare settings for diabetic patients. Its implementation in these scenarios is of paramount significance, enhancing the clinical accuracy in the diagnosis and therapeutic management of DR. This methodology not only streamlines patient evaluation but also contributes substantially to the optimization of clinical outcomes in DR management.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a major microvascular complication of diabetes, affecting a substantial portion of diabetic patients worldwide. Timely intervention is pivotal in mitigating the risk of blindness associated with DR, yet early detection remains a challenge due to the absence of early symptoms. Screening programs have emerged as a strategy to address this burden, and this paper delves into the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in advancing DR screening in Japan. There are two pathways for DR screening in Japan: a health screening pathway and a clinical referral path from physicians to ophthalmologists. AI technologies that realize automated image classification by applying deep learning are emerging. These technologies have exhibited substantial promise, achieving sensitivity and specificity levels exceeding 90% in prospective studies. Moreover, we introduce the potential of Generative AI and large language models (LLMs) to transform healthcare delivery, particularly in patient engagement, medical records, and decision support. Considering the use of AI in DR screening in Japan, we propose to follow a seven-step framework for systematic screening and emphasize the importance of integrating AI into a well-designed screening program. Automated scoring systems with AI enhance screening quality, but their effectiveness depends on their integration into the broader screening ecosystem. LLMs emerge as an important tool to fill gaps in the screening process, from personalized invitations to reporting results, facilitating a seamless and efficient system. However, it is essential to address concerns surrounding technical accuracy and governance before full-scale integration into the healthcare system. In conclusion, this review highlights the challenges in the current screening pathway and the potential for AI, particularly LLM, to revolutionize DR screening in Japan. The future direction will depend on leadership from ophthalmologists and stakeholders to address long-standing challenges in DR screening so that all people have access to accessible and effective screening.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the primary cause of vision loss among individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM). We developed, validated, and tested a deep learning (DL) system for classifying DME using images from three common commercially available optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices.

We trained and validated two versions of a multitask convolution neural network (CNN) to classify DME (center-involved DME [CI-DME], non-CI-DME, or absence of DME) using three-dimensional (3D) volume scans and 2D B-scans, respectively. For both 3D and 2D CNNs, we used the residual network (ResNet) as the backbone. For the 3D CNN, we used a 3D version of ResNet-34 with the last fully connected layer removed as the feature extraction module. A total of 73,746 OCT images were used for training and primary validation. External testing was performed using 26,981 images across seven independent data sets from Singapore, Hong Kong, the U.S., China, and Australia.

In classifying the presence or absence of DME, the DL system achieved area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of 0.937 (95% CI 0.920-0.954), 0.958 (0.930-0.977), and 0.965 (0.948-0.977) for the primary data set obtained from CIRRUS, SPECTRALIS, and Triton OCTs, respectively, in addition to AUROCs >0.906 for the external data sets. For further classification of the CI-DME and non-CI-DME subgroups, the AUROCs were 0.968 (0.940-0.995), 0.951 (0.898-0.982), and 0.975 (0.947-0.991) for the primary data set and >0.894 for the external data sets.

We demonstrated excellent performance with a DL system for the automated classification of DME, highlighting its potential as a promising second-line screening tool for patients with DM, which may potentially create a more effective triaging mechanism to eye clinics.

To develop a deep learning (DL) system that can detect referable diabetic retinopathy (RDR) and vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (VTDR) from images obtained on ultra-widefield scanning laser ophthalmoscope (UWF-SLO).

Observational, cross-sectional study.

A total of 9392 UWF-SLO images of 1903 eyes from 1022 subjects with diabetes from Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, India, and Argentina.

All images were labeled according to the presence or absence of RDR and the presence or absence of VTDR. Labeling was performed by retina specialists from fundus examination, according to the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale. Three convolutional neural networks (ResNet50) were trained with a transfer-learning procedure for assessing gradability and identifying VTDR and RDR. External validation was performed on 4 datasets spanning different geographical regions.

Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC); area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC); sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the DL system in gradability assessment; and detection of RDR and VTDR.

For gradability assessment, the system achieved an AUROC of 0.923 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.892-0.947), sensitivity of 86.5% (95% CI, 77.6-92.8), and specificity of 82.1% (95% CI, 77.3-86.2) for the primary validation dataset, and >0.82 AUROCs, >79.6% sensitivity, and >70.4% specificity for the geographical external validation datasets. For detecting RDR and VTDR, the AUROCs were 0.981 (95% CI, 0.977-0.984) and 0.966 (95% CI, 0.961-0.971), with sensitivities of 94.9% (95% CI, 92.3-97.9) and 87.2% (95% CI, 81.5-91.6), specificities of 95.1% (95% CI, 90.6-97.9) and 95.8% (95% CI, 93.3-97.6), and positive predictive values (PPVs) of 98.0% (95% CI, 96.1-99.0) and 91.1% (95% CI, 86.3-94.3) for the primary validation dataset, respectively. The AUROCs and accuracies for detecting both RDR and VTDR were >0.9% and >80%, respectively, for the geographical external validation datasets. The AUPRCs were >0.9, and sensitivities, specificities, and PPVs were >80% for the geographical external validation datasets for RDR and VTDR detection.

The excellent performance achieved with this DL system for image quality assessment and detection of RDR and VTDR in UWF-SLO images highlights its potential as an efficient and effective diabetic retinopathy screening tool.

Contributors The following document and appendices represent the third edition of the Practice Guidelines for Ocular Telehealth-Diabetic Retinopathy. These guidelines were developed by the Diabetic Retinopathy Telehealth Practice Guidelines Working Group. This working group consisted of a large number of subject matter experts in clinical applications for telehealth in ophthalmology. The editorial committee consisted of Mark B. Horton, OD, MD, who served as working group chair and Christopher J. Brady, MD, MHS, and Jerry Cavallerano, OD, PhD, who served as cochairs. The writing committees were separated into seven different categories. They are as follows: 1.Clinical/operational: Jerry Cavallerano, OD, PhD (Chair), Gail Barker, PhD, MBA, Christopher J. Brady, MD, MHS, Yao Liu, MD, MS, Siddarth Rathi, MD, MBA, Veeral Sheth, MD, MBA, Paolo Silva, MD, and Ingrid Zimmer-Galler, MD. 2.Equipment: Veeral Sheth, MD (Chair), Mark B. Horton, OD, MD, Siddarth Rathi, MD, MBA, Paolo Silva, MD, and Kristen Stebbins, MSPH. 3.Quality assurance: Mark B. Horton, OD, MD (Chair), Seema Garg, MD, PhD, Yao Liu, MD, MS, and Ingrid Zimmer-Galler, MD. 4.Glaucoma: Yao Liu, MD, MS (Chair) and Siddarth Rathi, MD, MBA. 5.Retinopathy of prematurity: Christopher J. Brady, MD, MHS (Chair) and Ingrid Zimmer-Galler, MD. 6.Age-related macular degeneration: Christopher J. Brady, MD, MHS (Chair) and Ingrid Zimmer-Galler, MD. 7.Autonomous and computer assisted detection, classification and diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy: Michael Abramoff, MD, PhD (Chair), Michael F. Chiang, MD, and Paolo Silva, MD.

The aim of this article was to describe recent advances in the use of new technology in diabetic retinopathy screening by looking at studies that assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these technologies.

The author conducts an ongoing search for articles relating to screening or management of diabetic retinopathy utilising Zetoc with keywords and contents page lists from relevant journals.

The areas discussed in this article are reference standards, alternatives to digital photography, area of retina covered by the screening method, size of the device and hand-held cameras, mydriasis versus non-mydriasis or a combination, measurement of distance visual acuity, grading of images, use of automated grading analysis and cost-effectiveness of the new technologies.

There have been many recent advances in technology that may be adopted in the future by screening programmes for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy but each device will need to demonstrate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness before more widespread adoption.

To evaluate the performance of ultrawide field scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (UWF-SLO) for assessing diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular oedema (DME) in a Chinese population, compared with clinical examination.

This is a retrospective cohort study. A series of 322 eyes from 164 patients with DM were included. Each patient underwent both dilated fundal examination with DR and DME grading by retina specialist and non-mydriatic 200° UWF-SLO (Daytona, Optos, Dunfermline, UK). The severity of DR and DME from UWF-SLO images was further graded by ophthalmologists, according to both international clinical DR and DME disease severity scales and the standard 7-field Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) scale. Any DR, DME and vision-threatening DR (VTDR) were treated as endpoints for this study.

23 out of 322 images (7.14%), including all four cases with proliferative DR on clinical examinations, were determined as ungradable. When the international scale was used for grading UWF-SLO images, the sensitivity of any DR, DME and VTDR was 67.7%, 67.4% and 72.6%, respectively; the specificity of any DR, DME and VTDR was 97.8%, 97.3% and 97.8%, respectively. The agreement with clinical grading in picking up any DR, DME and VTDR was substantial, with κ-values of 0.634, 0.694 and 0.707, respectively. The performance of UWF-SLO was shown to be lower when ETDRS scale was used for grading the images.

The performance of non-mydriatic UWF-SLO is comparable in identifying DR with that of clinical examination in a Chinese cohort. However, whether UWF-SLO can be considered as tool for screening DR is still undetermined.

To describe a decade long telemedicine screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the metropolitan area of Padova (North-East Italy) and to report about prevalence/incidence of DR and maculopathy, rate of progression to STDR and optimal screening interval in patients with no DR at first examination.

Observational, longitudinal, cohort study; 9347 patients with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) underwent 17,344 fundus exams (three-45° color photos per eye) in two diabetes clinics and were graded in the Reading Centre, by certified personnel. The incidence of STDR, progression of maculopathy and risk factors were evaluated by log Rank test (Kaplan-Meier method). A receiver operating curve was used to determine the optimal screening interval in patients who at the first examination had no DR.

The overall prevalence of DR was 27.6%:12.5% mild non proliferative (NPDR), 11.3% moderate NPDR, 2.9% severe NPDR and 0.9% proliferative (PDR). The overall prevalence of maculopathy was 5.7%: 2.8% mild, 2.2% moderate, and 0.7% severe maculopathy. The 10-year incidence of STDR was: 0.6% in no DR, 5.5% in mild NPDR and 21.1% in moderate NPDR at first examination. The 10-year incidence of maculopathy was: 2.1% mild, 1.7% moderate and 0.2% severe. The incidence of STDR in patients with type 1 and type 2 DM and duration>10years was 8.21% and 8.15%;in type 1 DM with duration <10years was 5.5% and in type 2 DM and duration <10years was 1.91%.In patients with no DR at first screening, the best (sensitivity-specificity) follow-up interval is 2.5years.

Screening every 2.5-year in patients without DR at the first examination seems to be adequate. Duration of disease is a relevant risk factor for progression to STDR, however patients with type 1 DM and duration <10years have greater incidence of STDR than patients with type 2 DM and similar disease duration. Epidemiologic data from this decade-long screening program in the North East of Italy may serve for implementing a national screening program.

The accessibility of ophthalmologists appears to influence the quality of screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR). The principal objective of this study was to analyze the effect of automobile travel time to the closest ophthalmologist on the time to DR screening.

This historical cohort study used reimbursement databases from the principal national health insurance fund. Patients were included if they had been reimbursed at least thrice for oral antidiabetic medications in the 12 months before the study start date. Patients were followed up from January 1, 2008, for 4 years. The expected event was a DR screening by an ocular fundus examination. The automobile travel time to the nearest ophthalmologist was calculated by the distance between communes, estimated by appropriate software. A Kaplan-Meier curve and a multivariate Cox model were used to model the effect of travel time on the time until DR screening. A sensitivity analysis of travel time described the results of the Cox model.

At the start of 2008, 6,573 patients living in 328 different municipalities were included. The multivariate model found that patients living 60 min or more away from an ophthalmologist had a lower instantaneous probability of DR screening than those living <30 min away (adjusted risk ratio = 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.95; p = 0.009). The sensitivity analysis showed that this difference became significant at 35 min of travel time.

Increased automobile travel time for patients with diabetes to the nearest ophthalmologist was associated with a longer time to DR screening.

The aim of this study was to analyse the changes in new certifications for both sight impairment (SI) and severe sight impairment (SSI, blindness) in Wales due to diabetic retinopathy (DR)/maculopathy between 2007 and 2015.

This is a retrospective analysis of annual data of new certifications for visual impairment and blindness (Certificate of Vision Impairment) for England and Wales derived from the national database provided by the Certifications Office, Moorfields Eye Hospital, over a period of 8 years from 2007.

In Wales there were 339 less new certifications for both SI and severe SSI from any cause combined from 2007-2008 to 2014-2015. The number SI and SSI combined specifically due to DR was reduced by 22 in people with known diabetes. This was a reduction in new certifications over the observation period from 82.4 to 46.9 per 100 000 (-43.1%) with a fall in SSI from 31.3 to 15.8 per 100 000 (-49.4%), respectively. During this observation period however, there was a parallel increase in 52 229 (39.8%) persons with diabetes in Wales.

While acknowledging the limitations of the certification process and the increasing numbers of persons with diabetes, the incidence of SI and SSI per 100 000 population of persons with diabetes in Wales has almost halved over an 8-year period up to 2015. This may reflect the earlier diagnosis of DR and sight-threatening DR since the introduction of screening and/or improved diabetes management with timely onward referral and newer treatments.

In Italy, the number of people living with diabetes is about 3.5 million (5.5% of the population), with an increase by about 60% in the last 20 years and with 1 person out of 3 older than 65 years. The Italian Health Service system estimates that 10 billion euros is spent annually on caring for patients with diabetes, a figure that increases yearly. No national data on prevalence and incidence of legal blindness in patients with diabetes and no national registry of patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) are currently available. However, the available epidemiological data (in several locations throughout the country) are consistent with those reported in other European countries. The use of telemedicine for the screening of DR in Italy is confined to geographically limited locations. The available data in the literature on implementation and use of telematic screening proved to be successful from patient, caregiver, and authorities point of view. This review addresses the available epidemiological data on DR and telematic screening realities in Italy and thus may help in establishing a national screening program.

PurposeTo describe the intraretinal microstructure using serial spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) preceding and following pars plana vitrectomy and delamination of fibrovascular membranes in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).MethodsThis retrospective, interventional case series includes 28 eyes. Outcome measures included LogMAR distance best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), SD-OCT integrity of photoreceptor inner and outer segments junction (IS/OS), and integrity of external limiting membrane (ELM).ResultsPre-operative central macular thickness (CMT) was significantly correlated with the final post-operative LogMAR BCVA (Pearson's coefficient r=0.89; P=0.001). The eyes were categorised into three groups based on post-operative IS/OS integrity (group 0: IS/OS intact; group 1: IS/OS irregular but not completely disrupted; group 2: IS/OS completely disrupted). Mean BCVA improved significantly in group 0 (n=9) from 1.13±0.75 preoperatively to 0.34±0.21 (Student's t-test: P=0.06), in group 1 (n=10) the BCVA improved from 0.88±0.56 to 0.58±0.31 (Student's t-test: P=0.053) and in group 2 (n=9) the BCVA improved from 1.64±0.53 to 1.53±0.75 (Student's t-test: P=0.652).IS/OS integrity and ELM integrity at 3 months post operatively, were significantly and positively correlated with final BCVA (Pearson's coefficient: r=0.83, P<0.001 and r=0.72, P<0.001, respectively).ConclusionsPre-operative CMT and post-operative disruption of the IS/OS and ELM are useful prognostic indicators in fibrovascular delamination surgery for patients with PDR.

Determine the prevalence and severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and risk factors in a large community based screening programme, in order to accurately estimate the future burden of this specific and debilitating complication of diabetes.

A cross-sectional analysis of 91,393 persons with diabetes, 5003 type 1 diabetes and 86,390 type 2 diabetes, at their first screening by the community based National Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Service for Wales from 2005 to 2009. Image capture used 2×45° digital images per eye following mydriasis, classified by qualified retinal graders with final grading based on the worst eye.

The prevalence of any DR and sight-threatening DR in those with type 1 diabetes was 56.0% and 11.2%, respectively, and in type 2 diabetes was 30.3% and 2.9%, respectively. The presence of DR, non-sight-threatening and sight-threatening, was strongly associated with increasing duration of diabetes for either type 1 or type 2 diabetes and also associated with insulin therapy in those with type 2 diabetes.

Prevalence of DR within the largest reported community-based, quality assured, DR screening programme, was higher in persons with type 1 diabetes; however, the major burden is represented by type 2 diabetes which is 94% of the screened population.

To investigate the distribution of new vessels (NV) in patients treated with pan-retinal photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). To assess whether it is safe to discharge treated PDR patients to the NHS Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (DESP) which uses two mydriatic 45° fields of each eye.

Consecutive treated PDR patients undergoing fundus fluorescein angiography between July 2010 and October 2011 for the purpose of looking for NV were included. The distribution of NV was mapped. In particular it was noted whether NV occurred in the area covered by the DESP standard screening images.

A total of 76 patients (108 eyes) met the inclusion criteria for the study. Leaking NV were found inside the DESP fields in 89% of study patients. In 108 eyes with leaking NV, there were a total of 35 NVD and 336 NVE. NV were found within DESP fields in 83% of eyes. Of the 336 NVE, 54% occurred within and 46% outside DESP standard fields. There was no statistically significant difference in the retinal quadrant distribution of NVE.

If these findings apply to the whole treated PDR population, NVE would be identified in 89% of patients undergoing DESP screening. This would support stable treated PDR patients being monitored within the DESP. We found no preferential clustering of NV within quadrants or between posterior and less posterior retina suggesting that there would be no benefit to the DESP of taking an additional field or graders concentrating on one particular quadrant more than another.

To determine the incidence of any and referable diabetic retinopathy in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus attending an annual screening service for retinopathy and whose first screening episode indicated no evidence of retinopathy.

Retrospective four year analysis.

Screenings at the community based Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Service for Wales, United Kingdom.

57,199 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who were diagnosed at age 30 years or older and who had no evidence of diabetic retinopathy at their first screening event between 2005 and 2009. 49,763 (87%) had at least one further screening event within the study period and were included in the analysis.

Annual incidence and cumulative incidence after four years of any and referable diabetic retinopathy. Relations between available putative risk factors and the onset and progression of retinopathy.

Cumulative incidence of any and referable retinopathy at four years was 360.27 and 11.64 per 1000 people, respectively. From the first to fourth year, the annual incidence of any retinopathy fell from 124.94 to 66.59 per 1000 people, compared with referable retinopathy, which increased slightly from 2.02 to 3.54 per 1000 people. Incidence of referable retinopathy was independently associated with known duration of diabetes, age at diagnosis, and use of insulin treatment. For participants needing insulin treatment with a duration of diabetes of 10 years or more, cumulative incidence of referable retinopathy at one and four years was 9.61 and 30.99 per 1000 people, respectively.

Our analysis supports the extension of the screening interval for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus beyond the currently recommended 12 months, with the possible exception of those with diabetes duration of 10 years or more and on insulin treatment.

Ocular telemedicine and telehealth have the potential to decrease vision loss from DR. Planning, execution, and follow-up are key factors for success. Telemedicine is complex, requiring the services of expert teams working collaboratively to provide care matching the quality of conventional clinical settings. Improving access and outcomes, however, makes telemedicine a valuable tool for our diabetic patients. Programs that focus on patient needs, consider available resources, define clear goals, promote informed expectations, appropriately train personnel, and adhere to regulatory and statutory requirements have the highest chance of achieving success.

The aim was to examine the progression and regression of diabetic retinopathy within a four-year period in a Chinese population with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a community optometry clinic in Hong Kong.

During the period May 2005 to November 2009, 5,160 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had attended at least two diabetic retinopathy screening sessions at a community optometry clinic were included as subjects in this study. All had retinal photographs taken of both eyes, which were of sufficiently good quality for grading. For the purpose of this study, diabetic retinopathy grading was based on the results of the worst eye. The main outcomes were the within four-year incidence of diabetic retinopathy and the incidence of progression and regression of diabetic retinopathy.

Of the 5,160 subjects in this study, 3,647 had no diabetic retinopathy, while 1,513 had diabetic retinopathy at the baseline visit. Of those 3,647 subjects with no diabetic retinopathy, the within four-year cumulative incidence of any diabetic retinopathy, mild or moderate non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy and sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy was 15.16 per cent, 14.45 per cent, 0.69 per cent and 0.03 per cent, respectively. Of those 1,513 subjects with diabetic retinopathy at baseline, the within four-year progression incidence of diabetic retinopathy was 6.61 per cent and the regression incidence of diabetic retinopathy was 45.54 per cent.

The high regression incidence of diabetic retinopathy suggests that it might not be necessary for all patients with diabetes to be screened annually. Other methods to determine the screening frequency for an individual patient should be explored.

The main aims were to ascertain the progress made in the implementation of retinal screening services and to explore any barriers or difficulties faced by the programmes. The survey focused on all the essential elements for retinal screening, including assessment and treatment of screen-positive cases. Eighty-five per cent of screening programmes have a coordinated screening service and 73% of these felt that they have made significant progress. Eighty-five per cent of screening units use 'call and recall' for appointments and 73.5% of programmes follow the National Screening Committee (NSC) guidance. Although many units worked closely with ophthalmology, further assessment and management of screen-positive patients was a cause for concern. The fast-track referral system, to ensure timely and appropriate care, has been difficult to engineer by several programmes. This is demonstrated by 48% of programmes having waiting lists for patients identified as needing further assessment and treatment for retinopathy. Ophthalmology service for people with diabetic retinopathy was provided by a dedicated ophthalmologist in 89.4% of the programmes. Sixty-six per cent of the programmes reported inadequate resources to sustain a high-quality service, while 26% highlighted the lack of infrastructure and 49% lacked information technology (IT) support. In conclusion, progress has been made towards establishing a national screening programme for diabetic retinopathy by individual screening units, with a number of programmes providing a structured retinal screening service. However, programmes face difficulties with resource allocation and compliance with Quality Assurance (QA) standards, especially those which apply to ophthalmology and IT support. Screening programmes need to be resourced adequately to ensure comprehensive coverage and compliance with QA.

To describe changes in risk profiles and yield in a screening programme and to investigate relationships between retinopathy prevalence, screening interval and risk factors.

We analysed a population of predominantly Type 2 diabetic patients, managed in general practice, and screened between 1990 and 2006, with up to 17 years' follow-up and up to 14 screening episodes each. We investigated associations between referable or sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR), screening interval and frequency of repeated screening, whilst adjusting for age, duration and treatment of diabetes, hypertension treatment and period.

Of 63 622 screening episodes among 20 788 people, 16 094 (25%) identified any retinopathy, 3136 (4.9%) identified referable retinopathy and 384 (0.60%) identified STDR. The prevalence of screening-detected STDR decreased by 91%, from 1.7% in 1991-1993 to 0.16% in 2006. The prevalence of referable retinopathy increased from 2.0% in 1991-1993 to 6.7% in 1998-2001, then decreased to 4.7% in 2006. Compared with screening intervals of 12-18 months, screening intervals of 19-24 months were not associated with increased risk of referable retinopathy [adjusted odds ratio 0.93, 94% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-1.05], but screening intervals of more than 24 months were associated with increased risk (odds ratio 1.56, 95% CI 1.41-1.75). Screening intervals of < 12 months were associated with high risks of referable retinopathy and STDR.

Over time the risk of late diagnosis of STDR decreased, possibly attributable to earlier diagnosis of less severe retinopathy, decreasing risk factors and systematic screening. Screening intervals of up to 24 months should be considered for lower risk patients.

We explored the potential of digital monochrome images as an alternative to colour slides in screening for diabetic retinopathy. Twenty-eight patients with diabetes were recruited for the study and 20 actually participated. Using a fundus camera (Nikon 505AF) one set of three digital images and one set of three colour slides were taken per eye. Two independent ophthalmologists graded the colour slides and the digital images for diabetic retinopathy. The ophthalmologists spent about two minutes grading each set of images, suggesting that specialists could potentially screen a large number of patients. The agreement between the two screening methods was 0.95 and 0.89, with respect to disease or no disease. The agreement (kappa) between the two ophthalmologists for grade of retinopathy was 0.47 when colour slides were employed and 0.61 when digital monochrome images were employed. The results indicate that digital red-free monochrome images represent a superior screening tool for diabetic retinopathy. Tele-screening may be beneficial when patients have to travel substantial distances to visit an ophthalmologist.

Sub-Saharan Africa faces an epidemic of diabetes with its attendant complications. Early treatment of diabetic retinopathy prevents visual impairment and blindness. However, very little has been done to establish diabetic retinopathy screening in Africa. We aimed to measure current use of the eye department by diabetics and the increase in eye examinations following education about diabetic eye disease by a dedicated nurse counselor and the offer of a free eye examination.

In a prospective study over 6 months we enrolled all diabetics over the age of 18 attending the diabetic clinic at KCMC. Data was collected on whether patients had had a previous dilated eye exam and whether they knew this was necessary. Education on diabetic eye disease and a referral form to the eye clinic for a free examination were given to the patient.

Three-hundred sixteen patients were enrolled in the study. 187 (59.1%) of the patients reported that they had undergone dilated fundus exam at some point since their diagnosis. 91 (28.8%) had undergone fundus examination within the past 12 months. Of the 316 patients, 114 (36%) came to the eye clinic with the referral form. 106 had not been examined in the last year. 65 of these had never been examined before. A logistic regression model demonstrated that knowledge that diabetes damages the eye (OR = 7.34, 95%CI = 4.66-11.57) and age (OR = 1.02, 95%CI = 1.01-1.03) but not duration of diabetes were independently associated with ever having had a dilated fundus exam and with having had an exam in the past year.

Only 29% of diabetics had had an eye examination in the previous year. After the intervention this increased to 47% of those who had not been examined. In the short term we achieved a reasonable, albeit less than optimal, increase in use of eye care services among diabetic patients. It is essential that we continue to strive to find ways to improve eye care for diabetic patients in Africa to avoid an increase in visual impairment.

Automated image analysis is being widely sought to reduce the workload required for grading images resulting from diabetic retinopathy screening programmes. The recognition of exudates in retinal images is an important goal for automated analysis since these are one of the indicators that the disease has progressed to a stage requiring referral to an ophthalmologist. Candidate exudates were detected using a multi-scale morphological process. Based on local properties, the likelihoods of a candidate being a member of classes exudate, drusen or background were determined. This leads to a likelihood of the image containing exudates which can be thresholded to create a binary decision. Compared to a clinical reference standard, images containing exudates were detected with sensitivity 95.0% and specificity 84.6% in a test set of 13,219 images of which 300 contained exudates. Depending on requirements, this method could form part of an automated system to detect images showing either any diabetic retinopathy or referable diabetic retinopathy.

To establish a clinically efficient, cost-effective quality assurance programme as part of a routine retinopathy screening service.

The operation of a quality assurance system as part of an ongoing retinal screening service is described. A random selection of 12% of images of all people reported to have retinopathy and of 2% reported to have no retinopathy are re-graded by a consultant ophthalmologist. Entry of the two sets of data into a purpose-designed excel spreadsheet allows automated calculation of sensitivity and specificity.

The results of quality assurance from August 2001 to July 2003 are reported. Out of 8351 screening episodes, 498 were re-examined. Of the 62 cases identified by the ophthalmologist as having referable retinopathy, four false negatives for detection were identified. Three of these had been assigned to early re-screening by the retinal screener but were still regarded as false negative by the parameters of the quality assurance system. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of sight-threatening retinopathy were 93.5% (95% CI = 84.3-98.2%) and 97.8% (95% CI = 95.8-98.9%), respectively.

A robust and cost-effective system has been developed to allow monitoring of performance of routine retinal screening which may be extended to meet current national recommendations.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness in people of working age in developed countries. DR is characterized by lesions of the retinal microvasculature. This paper describes a technique for visualizing the changes which occur in retinal pathology over a 1 year interval. Pairs of retinal images of the same eye were acuired 12 months apart within a DR screening programme. The images were normalized, registered and subtracted to generate a contrast-enhanced difference image displaying changes in retinal appearance. The normalization factor and registration error were quantified for 104 pairs of retinal images.

To determine how the workload of an ophthalmology department changed following the introduction of an organised retinal screening programme.

Information was collected from the hospital medical record of people with diabetes attending eye clinics over 4 years. The first year was before screening, the next 2 years the first round, and the fourth year the second round.

The total number of people with diabetes referred each year over the 4 year period was 853, 954, 974, 1051 consecutively. The number of people with diabetes in the county rose by 1400 per annum. The total number of referrals for an opinion about diabetic retinopathy was 227, 333, 363, 368, for cataract was 64, 57, 77, 93, and for glaucoma was 57, 62, 61, 68. The total number of patients referred for laser treatment over the 4 years was 77, 124, 111, and 63

This study suggests that the workload in the eye clinic increases in the first round of screening but in subsequent rounds it does not fall below the pre-screening level, except for laser treatment. This may be partly because of increasing numbers of people with diabetes. With the introduction of a national screening programme, this has significant workload implications for the National Health Service.

TOSCA was an EU-Commission supported international research project designed to develop telescreening services in diabetic retinopathy and glaucoma. This paper describes the quality assurance methods developed for the diabetic retinopathy telescreening service within the TOSCA project.

The study was performed in 1895 patients with diabetes between 2000 and 2002 at diabetic retinopathy screening sites in five European countries. Data were analysed centrally.

Patients attending each clinic's diabetic retinopathy screening service received standardized retinal photography. The images and associated data were transferred electronically to a remote location for grading. Each photographer uploading images and each grader downloading images for assessment was controlled by a systematic quality management approach. The quality assurance measures defined were image quality, intragrader reliability. A cockpit chart was developed for the management and presentation of relevant results and quality measures. For the intragrader reliability tests, 10% of the images were processed for a second grading. An algorithm for calculating differences between repeated gradings was developed.

The assessment of image quality for the different sites showed that only 0-0.7% were unassessable. One hundred per cent agreement for both gradings was achieved in 50-85% of graded cases, depending on site and grader, and an agreement better than 95% in 71-100% of cases.

A telemedicine-supported quality assurance process is practical and advantageous. The cockpit charts have proven to be useful tools when monitoring the performance of a telescreening service. Grader feedback showed high satisfaction with the quality assurance process.

This paper discusses the new national guidelines for a systematic screening programme to detect sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in the population of people with diabetes in England. A review of the literature examines the evidence base to support screening interventions and effective management and treatments in diabetic retinopathy. The current evidence supports the establishment of a digital retinal photography system using pupil dilation. A Policy Advisory Group has been formulated by the National Screening Committee to guide the meeting of this target in England. A conclusion is made that with increased effort and organisation, health care professionals can ensure that the screening programme is successfully implemented and rates of visual impairment and blindness caused by diabetic retinopathy can be reduced significantly.

The TOSCA project was set up to establish a tele-ophthalmology service to screen for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in Europe. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of establishing telemedicine-based digital screening for detecting DR and to evaluate the satisfaction of both patients and healthcare professionals with the screening procedures used within the TOSCA project.

The study was a non-randomized, multicentre study carried out in four different countries over a period of 3 months. Patients (n = 390) with diabetes aged > 12 years were included. Two digital retinal images per eye (macular and nasal) were taken and exported to a central server. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire to assess satisfaction. Accredited graders carried out grading remotely and the results were reported back to the referring centre. Previously graded patient data chosen randomly to represent examples of both DR and no DR were also sent anonymously to the grading centre at a frequency of approximately every 10 patients.

Most (99%) of the images were assessable enabling a retinopathy grade to be assigned to the patient. Patients found the retinal photography procedures acceptable; only 6% in one centre would not recommend the procedure. Healthcare professionals (photographers and graders) were also satisfied with the overall procedures. The average time taken to grade each patient was approximately 5 min.

This study demonstrated that it is feasible to electronically transmit and grade retinal images remotely using the TOSCA process. Built-in quality assurance procedures proved acceptable.

We describe a pilot study of measurement of quality assurance targets for diabetic retinopathy screening and performance comparison between 10 existing services, in preparation for the roll-out of the national programme.

In 1999 the UK National Screening Committee approved proposals for a national diabetic retinopathy risk reduction programme, including recommendations for quality assurance, but implementation was held pending publication of the National Service Framework for Diabetes. Existing services requested the authors to perform a pilot study of a QA scheme, indicating willingness to contribute data for comparison.

Objectives and quality standards were developed, following consultation with diabetologists, ophthalmologists and retinal screeners. Services submitted 2001/2 performance data, in response to a questionnaire, for anonymization, central analysis and comparison.

The 17 quality standards encompass all aspects of the programme from identification of patients to timeliness of treatment. Ten programmes took part, submitting all the data available. All returns were incomplete, but especially so from the optometry-based schemes. Eight or more services demonstrated they could reach the minimum level in only five of the 17 standards. Thirty per cent could not provide coverage data. All were running behind. Reasons for difficulties in obtaining data and/or failing to achieve standards included severe under-funding and little previous experience of QA. Information systems were limited and incompatible between diabetes and eye units, and there was a lack of co-ordinated management of the whole programme.

Quality assurance is time-consuming, expensive and inadequately resourced. The pilot study identified priorities for local action. National programme implementation must involve integral quality assurance mechanisms from the outset.

To assess the effects of (1) mydriasis and (2) single versus three field photography on screening for diabetic eye disease using digital photography

Slit lamp examination findings were compared to digital fundal photographs for the detection of any retinopathy and for referable retinopathy in 398 patients (794 eyes). A Topcon TRC-NW6S digital non-mydriatic fundus camera was used. Three photographic strategies were used: undilated single field, dilated single field, and dilated multiple fields. The photographs were presented in random order to one of two retinal screeners. For the single field photographs the screeners were masked to the use of mydriatics. In 13% of fundal photographs, grading was performed by both, rather than just one grader.

Mydriasis reduced the proportion of ungradable photographs from 26% to 5% (p<0.001). Neither mydriasis nor three field photography improved the sensitivity or specificity for the detection of any retinopathy or of referable retinopathy when compared with undilated single field photography. The sensitivity and specificity for detecting referable retinopathy using undilated single field photography was 77% (95% CI 71 to 84) and 95 % (95% CI 93 to 97) respectively. Using dilated single field photography the figures were 81% (95% CI 76 to 87) and 92% (95% CI 90 to 94) respectively. Using dilated three field photography the figures were 83% (95% CI 78 to 88) and 93% (95% CI 91 to 96) respectively. Intergrader reliability for the detection of referable retinopathy in gradable photographs was excellent (Kappa values 0.86-1.00).

Mydriasis reduces the technical failure rate. Mydriasis and the three field photography as used in this study do not increase the sensitivity or specificity of detecting diabetic retinopathy.

To assess the proportion of people with diabetes screened for retinopathy according to provision of screening services.

Twenty-five health authorities in England and Wales were sampled after stratification by type of screening provision for diabetic retinopathy. Nine did not have a population-based screening scheme, six had an optometry scheme, six had a camera scheme and four had schemes with more than one method of screening ('mixed schemes'). Within each authority general practices were randomly sampled, 129 in total, and in each the records of a sample of diabetic patients examined.

Of the 9200 records examined, 5812 (63.2%) had a record of one or more retinal examinations from any source in the year before the survey. This proportion did not differ significantly according to type of screening provision. The proportion of people with one or more retinal examinations by an 'expert' (defined as ophthalmologist, diabetologist, optometrist or screening scheme) in the last year was 44.7% where there was no screening scheme and 62.2%, 59.4%, and 61.6%, respectively, where optometry, camera and mixed schemes were present. Adjusted relative odds (95% confidence interval) for a retinal examination from any source in the last year compared with areas with no screening schemes were 1.19 (0.73, 1.93), 1.26 (0.80, 1.98), and 1.19 (0.77, 1.84) for camera, optometry and mixed schemes, respectively. Equivalent figures for an expert retinal examination were 2.30 (1.51, 3.49), 1.86 (1.25, 2.78) and 2.13 (1.32, 3.45). Coverage by schemes themselves did not differ according to type of scheme. Highest coverage rates, including examinations by screening schemes, were achieved in those treated with insulin, and the lowest rates found in those treated with diet alone.

Screening schemes have had a small impact on overall retinal examinations, but a higher impact on the coverage of examinations performed by experts.

The Health Technology Board Scotland (HTBS) have issued recommendations for eye screening in patients with diabetes. These are based on evidence-based clinical studies. Evidence-based studies do not answer all the practical issues, and some conclusions have thus been extrapolated from the known evidence base. Other factors such as patient issues, organizational issues and cost effectiveness have also been incorporated into the recommendations. HTBS recommend single-field digital retinal photography. Retinal photography best addresses the issues of adequate sensitivity and accountable quality assurance. Non-mydriatic photography is recommended, followed by immediate use of dilating eye drops if it is unsuccessful, followed by slit-lamp examination if both of these approaches fail. An independent grading scheme has been established, which is similar to the 'Global', and compatible with the National Screening Committee (NSC) grading scheme. The rationale for these recommendations, and debate behind some of the decisions, is laid out in this article.

A National Screening Programme for diabetic eye disease in the UK is in development. We propose a grading and early disease management protocol to detect sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy and any retinopathy, which will allow precise quality assurance at all steps while minimizing false-positive referral to the hospital eye service.

Expert panel structured discussions between 2000 and 2002 with review of existing evidence and grading classifications.

Principles of the protocol include: separate grading of retinopathy and maculopathy, minimum number of steps, compatible with central monitoring, expandable for established more complex systems and for research, no lesion counting, no 'questionable' lesions, attempt to detect focal exudative, diffuse and ischaemic maculopathy and fast track referral from primary or secondary graders. Sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy is defined as: preproliferative retinopathy or worse, sight-threatening maculopathy and/or the presence of photocoagulation. In the centrally reported minimum data set retinopathy is graded into four levels: none (R0), background (R1), preproliferative (R2), proliferative (R3). Maculopathy and photocoagulation are graded as absent (M0, P0) or present (M1, P1).

The protocol developed by the Diabetic Retinopathy Grading and Disease Management Working Party represents a new consensus upon which national guidelines can be based leading to the introduction of quality-assured screening for people with diabetes.

To measure the cumulative incidence of any retinopathy, maculopathy and sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR), and calculate optimal screening intervals by retinopathy grade at baseline for patients with Type 1 diabetes attending an established systematic retinal screening programme.

All patients with Type 1 diabetes registered with enrolled general practitioners, excluding only those attending an ophthalmologist, were studied if retinopathy data was available at baseline and at least one further screen event. Screening utilized non-stereoscopic 3-field mydriatic photography and modified Wisconsin grading. STDR was defined as moderate pre-proliferative retinopathy or greater and/or significant maculopathy in any eye.

Patients (n=501) underwent 2742 screen events. Cumulative incidence of STDR in patients without baseline retinopathy was 0.3% (95% CI 0.0-0.9) at 1 year, rising to 3.9% (1.4-5.4) at 5 years. Rates of progression to STDR in patients with background and mild pre-proliferative retinopathy at 1 year were 3.6% (0.5-6.6) and 13.5% (4.2-22.7), respectively. Progression to STDR was greater in patients with a higher grade of baseline retinopathy (P=0.001) or a longer disease duration (P=0.003). For a 95% likelihood of remaining free of STDR, mean screening intervals by baseline status were: no retinopathy 5.7 (95% CI 3.5-7.6) years, background 1.3 (0.4-2.0) years and mild pre-proliferative 0.4 (0-0.8) years.

Screening at 2-3 year intervals, rather than annually, for patients without retinopathy in Type 1 diabetes is feasible because of the low risk of progression to STDR, and may result in significant cost savings for a screening programme. Patients with higher grades of retinopathy require screening at least annually or more frequent.

To evaluate the feasibility and cost of screening for diabetic eye disease in homebound nursing home residents not attending a systematic screening programme.

Postal survey identification of residents with diabetes in all nursing homes in Liverpool. An ophthalmologist and nurse performed Bailey-Lovie logmar visual acuity (VA), portable slit-lamp examination, fundus photography, and subjective assessment of ability to cooperate with treatment in a sample of homes. Modified Wisconsin photographic grading was performed. Screen-positive patients were invited to a dedicated assessment clinic. Sight-threatening diabetic eye disease (STED) was defined as any of: moderate preproliferative retinopathy or worse, circinate maculopathy, or exudate within 1 disc diameter of fixation.

A total of 54 (78%) nursing homes responded reporting 199/2427 (8.2%) residents with diabetes. Of these, 64/80 (80%) residents in 17 homes were examined: VA possible in 50 (78%); slit-lamp examination in 56 (88%); gradable photographs in at least one eye in 34 (53%); STED in 12 (35%) patients. In all, 35 (70%) patients had Snellen-equivalent VA worse than 6/12 in the better eye, of whom 13 (26%) were worse than 6/60. Of 29 screen positive patients, 12 attended the assessment clinic: one was unable to cooperate outside the home; 11 continue under ophthalmic review, four for previously undetected STED of which one listed for laser photocoagulation. Total cost pound 16,980; cost per screen event pound 60.30.

Systematic eye screening in homebound patients with diabetes detects disease but follow-up and treatment is only feasible in a small proportion and at high cost. Alternative targeted assessment is recommended.

To compare the respective performances of digital retinal imaging, fundus photography and slit-lamp biomicroscopy performed by trained optometrists, in screening for diabetic retinopathy. To assess the potential contribution of automated digital image analysis to a screening programme.

A group of 586 patients recruited from a diabetic clinic underwent three or four mydriatic screening methods for retinal examination. The respective performances of digital imaging (n=586; graded manually), colour slides (n=586; graded manually), and slit-lamp examination by specially trained optometrists (n=485), were evaluated against a reference standard of slit-lamp biomicroscopy by ophthalmologists with a special interest in medical retina. The performance of automated grading of the digital images by computer was also assessed.

Slit-lamp examination by optometrists for referable diabetic retinopathy achieved a sensitivity of 73% (52-88) and a specificity of 90% (87-93). Using two-field imaging, manual grading of red-free digital images achieved a sensitivity of 93% (82-98) and a specificity of 87% (84-90), and for colour slides, a sensitivity of 96% (87-100) and a specificity of 89% (86-91). Almost identical results were achieved for both methods with single macular field imaging. Digital imaging had a lower technical failure rate (4.4% of patients) than colour slide photography (11.9%). Applying an automated grading protocol to the digital images detected any retinopathy, with a sensitivity of 83% (77-89) and a specificity of 71% (66-75) and diabetic macular oedema with a sensitivity of 76% (53-92) and a specificity of 85% (82-88).

Both manual grading methods produced similar results whether using a one- or two-field protocol. Technical failures rates, and hence need for recall, were lower with digital imaging. One-field grading of fundus photographs appeared to be as effective as two-field. The optometrists achieved the lowest sensitivities but reported no technical failures. Automated grading of retinal images can improve efficiency of resource utilization in diabetic retinopathy screening.

Incidence data on which to base targets and protocols for screening for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy are few. We aimed to investigate yearly and cumulative incidence of any retinopathy, maculopathy, and sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes in an established systematic programme and to calculate optimum screening intervals according to retinopathy grade at baseline.

We investigated all patients with type 2 diabetes registered with enrolled general practices (except those who were attending an ophthalmologist) who had retinopathy data available at baseline and at least one further screening event. To screen patients, we used non-stereoscopic three-field mydriatic photography and modified Wisconsin grading. Sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy was defined as moderate preproliferative retinopathy or worse, or clinically significant maculopathy in either or both eyes.

Results were obtained from 20 570 screening events. Yearly incidence of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in patients without retinopathy at baseline was 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.5) in the first year, rising to 1.8% (1.2-2.5) in the fifth year; cumulative incidence at 5 years was 3.9% (2.8-5.0). Rates of progression to sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in year 1 by baseline status were: background 5.0% (3.5-6.5), and mild preproliferative 15% (10.2-19.8). For a 95% probability of remaining free of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy, mean screening intervals by baseline status were: no retinopathy 5.4 years (95% CI 4.7-6.3), background 1.0 years (0.7-1.3), and mild preproliferative 0.3 years (0.2-0.5).

A 3-year screening interval could be safely adopted for patients with no retinopathy, but yearly or more frequent screening is needed for patients with higher grades of retinopathy.

This article reviews the current status of retinopathy screening schemes in the UK. There is evidence that high-quality diabetic retinopathy screening schemes are in existence but provision is patchy. Many health authorities have ad hoc screening programmes reaching only about 60% of patients, with unacceptable or undocumented efficacy and minimal quality control. Several models of screening are currently in use with the current preferred option being camera-based screening. Digital imaging systems offer the best prospects for image acquisition, although at present evidence of adequate effectiveness only exists for 35 mm film-based systems. The final report of the National Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programme commissioned by the UK National Screening Committee for inclusion into the national service framework for diabetes, is thus eagerly awaited and should set standards for screening programmes, in order to improve the care of all those with diabetes. Quality assurance will be the main driver in the immediate future of improvements in screening programmes. Research data will provide the evidence to refine techniques and set targets in the longer term, with the emphasis on cost-effectiveness and quality of life.

There is a need for continuous evaluation of screening services for diabetic retinopathy against agreed performance standards. We describe a quality assurance programme implemented in Newcastle in January 1999 and report on outcomes at 18 months.

Annual retinal screening is performed using combined retinal photography and direct ophthalmoscopy in two streams. Diabetologists perform screening in the Hospital Screening Programme, which serves patients whose diabetes is managed in specialist clinics, and trained retinal screeners perform screening in the District Screening Programme, which serves patients whose diabetes is managed in the community. Reference standard examination of dilated fundoscopy with a slit-lamp and condensing lens was performed by an ophthalmologist at periodic sessions on consecutive patients attending for screening.

Six hundred and nine (6.4%) of 9468 patients screened underwent reference standard examination. The sensitivity and specificity of detection of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) was 82.5% and 98%, respectively, for the Hospital Screening Programme; 85.7% and 95.7%, respectively, for the District Screening Programme; and 83.3% and 96.8% for both services combined. One hundred and ten (18.1%) of 609 patients audited were referred to ophthalmology as a result of screening, and this led to 16 patients (2.6%) receiving laser photocoagulation for STDR. Reference standard examination identified a further four patients (0.7%) who required laser photocoagulation.

Preliminary data indicate that satisfactory performance standards are being achieved. The National Service Framework for Diabetes requires that all units institute quality assurance for retinal screening, and we report the practical implementation of this in one district.