Evaluating predictive modeling's potential to improve teleretinal screening participation in urban safety net clinics.

INTRODUCTION: Screening guidelines for diabetic patients recommend yearly eye examinations to detect diabetic retinopathy and other forms of diabetic eye disease. However, annual screening rates for retinopathy in US urban safety net settings remain low. METHODS: Using data gathered from a study of teleretinal screening in six urban safety net clinics, we assessed whether predictive modeling could be of value in identifying patients at risk of developing retinopathy. We developed and examined the accuracy of two predictive modeling approaches for diabetic retinopathy in a sample of 513 diabetic individuals, using routinely available clinical variables from retrospective medical record reviews. Bayesian networks and radial basis function (neural) networks were learned using ten-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: The predictive models were modestly predictive with the best model having an AUC of 0.71. DISCUSSION: Using routinely available clinical variables to predict patients at risk of developing retinopathy and to target them for annual eye screenings may be of some usefulness to safety net clinics.

Teleretinal screening for diabetic retinopathy in six Los Angeles urban safety-net clinics: final study results.

In a previous paper, we presented initial findings from a study on the feasibility and challenges of implementing teleretinal screening for diabetic retinopathy in an urban safety net setting facing eyecare specialist shortages. This paper presents some final results from that study, which involved six South Los Angeles safety net clinics. A total of 2,732 unique patients were screened for diabetic retinopathy by three ophthalmologist readers, with 1035 receiving a recommendation for referral to specialty care. Referrals included 48 for proliferative diabetic retinopathy, 115 for severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), 247 for moderate NPDR, 246 for mild NPDR, 97 for clinically significant macular edema, and 282 for a non-diabetic condition, such as glaucoma. Image quality was also assessed, with ophthalmologist readers grading 4% to 13% of retinal images taken at the different clinics as being inadequate for any diagnostic interpretation.

Validity of self-reported eye disease and treatment in a population-based study: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study.

PURPOSE: To examine the validity of self-reported eye disease, including cataract, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy (DR), and self-reported surgical treatment for cataract and DR in the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES). DESIGN: Population-based, cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6357 Latinos aged 40+ years from the LALES. METHODS: Participants underwent a detailed interview, including survey questions about ocular health, diagnoses, and timing of last eye examination, and a standardized clinical examination. Self-report was compared with examination to determine sensitivity and specificity by length of time since last eye examination. Stepwise logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with inaccurate self-report. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for 4 self-reported eye diseases (cataract, AMD, glaucoma, and DR) and for surgical treatment of cataract and DR. Odds ratios (ORs) were determined for factors associated with inaccurate self-report underestimating eye disease and treatment. RESULTS: For each disease, sensitivity and specificity in those who reported their last eye examination as <1 year ago were 36.8% and 92.5% for cataract, 37.7% and 96.3% for glaucoma, 5.1% and 98.9% for AMD, and 25.7% and 94.2% for DR, respectively. Self-report was less accurate with increasing time since last eye examination. Inaccurate self-report was independently associated with better visual acuity (OR, 2.4), <2 comorbidities (OR, 1.7), last eye examination/visit 1 to 5 years ago and ≥ 5 years ago (OR, 2.3 and 4.9, respectively), and less education (OR, 1.3 for 7-12 years and 1.7 for <7 years). Of 88 participants surgically treated for cataract who reported an eye examination <1 year ago, sensitivity and specificity of self-reported surgical history were 90.9% and 99.9%, respectively. Of the 31 participants treated for DR (laser/surgery) and reporting an eye examination <1 year ago, sensitivity and specificity of self-reported surgical history were 19.4% and 99.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among Latinos, self-reporting of eye disease and surgical history provides a significant underestimate of the disease burden. This may lead to significant misclassification in vision research if self-report alone is used to identify persons with eye disease.

Teleretinal screening for diabetic retinopathy in six Los Angeles urban safety-net clinics: initial findings.

Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of blindness in US adults. This paper presents initial results of a teleretinal screening project for diabetic retinopathy involving six Los Angeles safety net clinics. A total of 1,943 patients have been screened for diabetic retinopathy by three ophthalmologist readers, with 416 receiving a recommendation for referral to specialty care. Of the cases recommended for referral, 24 had proliferative diabetic retinopathy, 62 had severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), 60 had moderate NPDR, 19 had mild NPDR, 138 had a non-diabetic condition, such as glaucoma, 63 had clinically significant macular edema without retinopathy and 50 had non-gradable images. Between 3% and 12.2% of retinal images taken at the clinics were assessed by readers as inadequate for any interpretation. The study shows the feasibility and challenges of teleretinal screening for diabetic retinopathy in urban areas facing specialist shortages and an overburdened, under-resourced safety net care-delivery system.