EVALUATION OF A TELEMEDICINE MODEL TO FOLLOW UP PATIENTS WITH EXUDATIVE AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a telemedicine model to follow up patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration and compare the time spent using this model with the time spent conducting office examinations. METHODS: Results of office and telemedicine evaluations were compared to determine whether patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration previously treated with intravitreal injections needed additional treatment. The office examinations included visual acuity measurement, fundus examination, and optical coherence tomography. The telemedicine evaluation included evaluation of retinography images, optical coherence tomography images, and visual acuity data obtained in the office. We also measured the time spent on telemedicine evaluations and compared it with the time spent on office examinations. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included. A comparison of office and remote diagnostic decisions showed the same results in 181 cases. Among the 20 remaining patients and considering office diagnostic decisions as the gold standard, 17 (8%) patients had false-positive diagnoses and 3 (1%) had false-negative diagnoses. The sensitivity and specificity of the telemedicine evaluations were 96% and 85%, respectively. The average time spent on remote evaluations was 1 minute 21 seconds compared with 10 minutes spent on office examination (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The telemedicine model can be a useful alternative for following up patients with age-related macular degeneration.

Formalize clinical processes into electronic health information systems: Modelling a screening service for diabetic retinopathy.

Most healthcare services use information and communication technologies to reduce and redistribute the workload associated with follow-up of chronic conditions. However, the lack of normalization of the information handled in and exchanged between such services hinders the scalability and extendibility. The use of medical standards for modelling and exchanging information, especially dual-model based approaches, can enhance the features of screening services. Hence, the approach of this paper is twofold. First, this article presents a generic methodology to model patient-centered clinical processes. Second, a proof of concept of the proposed methodology was conducted within the diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening service of the Health Service of Navarre (Spain) in compliance with a specific dual-model norm (openEHR). As a result, a set of elements required for deploying a model-driven DR screening service has been established, namely: clinical concepts, archetypes, termsets, templates, guideline definition rules, and user interface definitions. This model fosters reusability, because those elements are available to be downloaded and integrated in any healthcare service, and interoperability, since from then on such services can share information seamlessly.

On the seamless, harmonized use of ISO/IEEE11073 and openEHR.

Standardized exchange of clinical information is a key factor in the provision of high quality health care systems. In this context, the openEHR specification facilitates the management of health data in electronic health records (EHRs), while the ISO/IEEE11073 (also referred to as X73PHD) family of standards provides a reference framework for medical device interoperability. Hospitals and health care providers using openEHR require flawless integration of data coming from external sources, such as X73PHD. Hence, a harmonization process is crucial for achieving a seamless, coherent use of those specifications in real scenarios. Such harmonization is the aim of this paper. Thus, the classes and attributes of a representative number of X73PHD specializations for medical devices--weight, temperature, blood pressure, pulse and heart rate, oximetry, and electrocardiograph--along with the X73PHD core document--ISO/IEEE11073-20601--have been analyzed and mapped to openEHR archetypes. The proposed methodology reuses the existing archetypes when possible and suggests new ones--or appropriate modifications--otherwise. As a result, this paper analyzes the inconsistencies found and the implications thereof in the coordinated use of these two standards. The procedure has also shown how existing standards are able to influence the archetype development process, enhancing the existing archetype corpus.

Diabetic retinopathy screening by general practitioners using non-mydriatic retinography.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of visual loss in people aged 30 to 69 years. Most authorities recommend screening of the ocular fundus to prevent severe visual loss. The increasing incidence of diabetes mellitus and fewer ophthalmologists in many countries is leading to inadequate screening. Establishing an adequate system for DR screening is a complex issue and represents a challenge for most health authorities. To alleviate the burden of DR screening for most health systems, some investigators have suggested that general practitioners (GPs) perform the initial screenings. The aim of this article was to review the current status of DR screening performed by GPs using non-mydriatic retinography. The five studies analyzed in this review indicated that after adequate training GPs can be effective and reliable screeners of DR using non-mydriatic retinography. Including GPs in the screening model would be a useful way to alleviate the increasing demands of ophthalmic care resulting from the increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus. In addition, GPs would have full control of the diabetic process, which could bolster their motivation and confidence in other areas of diabetes care and medical practice.

Diabetic retinopathy screening with non-mydriatic retinography by general practitioners: 2-year results.

AIMS: To ascertain in real practice the diagnosis rate of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients considered to have positive screening test by general practitioners (GPs) and what are the reasons for the false positive diagnosis. METHODS: Four GPs previously instructed in the interpretation of retinal photographs evaluated the digital retinography images of patients with diabetes obtained during a 2-year period. When the images were considered normal, a new appointment was scheduled for 1 year later and a report was emailed to the referring physician. Patients with any sign of DR or other suspicious retinal alterations and those whose images were considered difficult or impossible to assess were referred to an ophthalmologist. RESULTS: A total of 2750 patients were referred for screening. The images of 2036 (74%) patients were considered normal, and the images of 714 (26%) patients were sent to ophthalmologists. Among the referred patients, 392 (55%) did not have DR, 244 (34%) had DR, and 78 (11%) had unreadable images. The retinal images of 240 patients whose fundi were considered normal were read again by ophthalmologists to evaluate false negatives. Of them, 16 patients (7%) had DR but only two patients (1%) had treatable DR. CONCLUSIONS: After adequate training, GPs can screen for DR with a high level of accuracy using non-mydriatic retinography. There is a need to strengthen the training of GPs in order to recognize non-visual threatening abnormalities.

Diabetic retinopathy screening using tele-ophthalmology in a primary care setting.

We evaluated tele-ophthalmology for diabetic retinopathy screening in a primary care setting. Four general practitioners (GPs) were taught to assess non-mydriatic retinography images of patients with diabetes. After training, a total of 1223 patients were screened using this method: 926 (76%) did not have diabetic retinopathy and 297 (24%) were referred for an ophthalmologic assessment. Of the 297 patients, 186 (15%) did not have diabetic retinopathy and were considered to be false positives, 85 (7%) had diabetic retinopathy and in 26 cases (2%) the retinography images were unreadable. The specificity of GPs for detecting diabetic retinopathy by non-mydriatic retinography was 83%. Ophthalmologists also assessed 120 patients who had been diagnosed as normal to detect false negatives. Ten patients (8.3%) had mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy with small isolated retinal hemorrhages. Only one patient (0.8%) had treatable diabetic retinopathy with hard exudates and microaneurysms. The sensitivity of GPs for detecting diabetic retinopathy was 90.9%; the sensitivity for detecting treatable lesions was 99.2%. We concluded that adequately trained GPs can screen for treatable lesions of diabetic retinopathy with a very high level of reliability using non-mydriatic retinography.