Disparities Between Teleretinal Imaging Findings and Patient-Reported Diabetic Retinopathy Status and Follow-up Eye Care Interval: A 10-Year Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess self-reported awareness of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and concordance of eye examination follow-up compared with findings from concurrent retinal images. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational 10-year study of 26,876 consecutive patients with diabetes who underwent retinal imaging during an endocrinology visit. Awareness and concordance were evaluated using questionnaires and retinal imaging. RESULTS: Awareness information and gradable images were available in 25,360 patients (94.3%). Severity of DR by imaging was as follows: no DR (n = 14,317; 56.5%), mild DR (n = 6,805; 26.8%), or vision-threatening DR (vtDR; n = 4,238; 16.7%). In the no, mild, and vtDR groups, 96.7%, 88.5%, and 54.9% of patients, respectively, reported being unaware of any prior DR. When DR was present, reporting no prior DR was associated with shorter diabetes duration, milder DR, last eye examination >1 year before, no dilation, no scheduled appointment, and less specialized provider (all P < 0.001). Among patients with vtDR, 41.2%, 58.1%, and 64.2% did not report being aware of any DR and follow-up was concordant with current DR severity in 66.7%, 41.3%, and 25.4% (P < 0.001) of patients when prior examination was performed by a retinal specialist, nonretinal ophthalmologist, or optometrist (P < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial discrepancies exist between DR presence, patient awareness, and concordance of follow-up across all DR severity levels. These discrepancies are present across all eye care provider types, with the magnitude influenced by provider type. Therefore, patient self-report should not be relied upon to reflect DR status. Modification of medical care and education models may be necessary to enhance retention of ophthalmic knowledge in patients with diabetes and ensure accurate communication between all health care providers.

INTEGRATING MACULAR OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY WITH ULTRAWIDE-FIELD IMAGING IN A DIABETIC RETINOPATHY TELEMEDICINE PROGRAM USING A SINGLE DEVICE.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of combined macular spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and ultrawide field retinal imaging (UWFI) within a telemedicine program. METHODS: Comparative cohort study of consecutive patients with both UWFI and SD-OCT. Ultrawide field retinal imaging and SD-OOCT were independently evaluated for diabetic macular edema (DME) and nondiabetic macular abnormality. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with SD-OCT as the gold standard. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-two eyes from 211 diabetic patients were evaluated. Diabetic macular edema severity by UWFI was as follows: no DME 93.4%, noncenter involved DME (nonciDME) 5.1%, ciDME 0.7%, ungradable DME 0.7%. SD-OCT was ungradable in 0.5%. Macular abnormality was identified in 34 (8.1%) eyes by UWFI and in 44 (10.4%) eyes by SD-OCT. Diabetic macular edema represented only 38.6% of referable macular abnormality identified by SD-OCT imaging. Sensitivity/specificity of UWFI compared with SD-OCT was 59%/96% for DME and 33%/99% for ciDME. Sensitivity/specificity of UWFI compared with SDOCT was 3%/98% for epiretinal membrane. CONCLUSION: Addition of SD-OCT increased the identification of macular abnormality by 29.4%. More than 58.3% of the eyes believed to have any DME on UWF imaging alone were false-positives by SD-OCT. The integration of SD-OCT with UWFI markedly increased detection and reduced false-positive assessments of DME and macular abnormality in a teleophthalmology program.

Association of Maximizing Visible Retinal Area by Manual Eyelid Lifting With Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy Severity and Detection of Predominantly Peripheral Lesions When Using Ultra-Widefield Imaging.

IMPORTANCE: Methods that increase visible retinal area (VRA; measured in millimeters squared) may improve identification of diabetic retinopathy (DR) lesions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of dilation and manual eyelid lifting (MLL) with VRA on ultra-widefield imaging (UWFI) and the association of VRA with grading of DR severity and detection of predominantly peripheral lesions (PPLs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective, comparative case-control study at the Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, Massachusetts. Nonmydriatic UWFI with MLL was acquired from a DR teleophthalmology program (Joslin Vision Network [JVN]). A second cohort of mydriatic UWFI was acquired at an academic retina practice (Beetham Eye Institute [BEI]) from November 6, 2017, to November 6, 2018, and with MLL thereafter until November 6, 2019. Fully automated algorithms determined VRA and hemorrhage and/or microaneurysm (HMA) counts. Predominantly peripheral lesions and HMAs were defined as present when at least 1 field had greater HMA number in the peripheral retina than within the corresponding Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study field. Participants included 3014 consecutive patients (5919 eyes) undergoing retinal imaging at JVN and BEI. EXPOSURES: Dilation and MLL performed at the time of UWFI. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Visible retinal area, DR severity, and presence of PPLs. RESULTS: Of the 3014 participants, mean (SD) age was 56.1 (14.5) years, 1302 (43.2%) were female, 2450 (81.3%) were White, and mean (SD) diabetes duration was 15.9 (11.4) years. All images from 5919 eyes with UWFI were analyzed. Mean (SD) VRA was 665.1 (167.6) mm2 for all eyes (theoretical maximal VRA, 923.9 mm2), 550.8 (240.7) mm2 for nonmydriatic JVN with MLL (1418 eyes [24.0%]), 688.1 (119.9) mm2 for mydriatic BEI images (3650 eyes [61.7%]), and 757.0 (69.7) mm2 for mydriatic and MLL BEI images (851 eyes [14.4%]). Dilation increased VRA by 25% (P < .001) and MLL increased VRA an additional 10% (P < .001). Nonmydriatic MLL increased VRA by 11.0%. With MLL, HMA counts in UWFI fields increased by 41.7% (from 4.8 to 6.8; P < .001). Visible retinal area was moderately associated with increasing PPL-HMA overall and in each cohort (all, r = 0.33; BEI, r = 0.29; JVN, r = 0.36; P < .001). In JVN images, increasing VRA was associated with more PPL-HMA (quartile 1 [Q1], 23.7%; Q2, 45.8%; Q3, 60.6%; and Q4, 69.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using fully automated VRA and HMA detection algorithms, pupillary dilation and eyelid lifting were shown to substantially increase VRA and PLL-HMA detection. Given the importance of HMA and PPL for determining risk of DR progression, these findings emphasize the importance of maximizing VRA for optimal risk assessment in clinical trials and teleophthalmology programs.

Factors Affecting Predominantly Peripheral Lesion Identification and Grading.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine factors affecting predominantly peripheral lesion (PPL) grading, such as qualitative versus quantitative assessment, device type, and severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in ultrawide field color images (UWF-CIs). Methods: Patients with DR had UWF-CI qualitatively graded for PPL using standardized techniques and had hemorrhages/microaneurysms (H/Mas) individually annotated for quantitative PPL grading on two different ultrawide field devices. Results: Among 791 eyes of 481 patients, 38.2% had mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 34.7% had moderate NPDR, and 27.1% had severe NPDR to proliferative DR (PDR). The overall agreement between qualitative and quantitative PPL grading was moderate (ĸ = 0.423, P < 0.001). Agreement rates were fair in eyes with mild NPDR (ĸ = 0.336, P < 0.001) but moderate in eyes with moderate NPDR (ĸ = 0.525, P < 0.001) and severe NPDR-PDR (ĸ = 0.409, P < 0.001). Increasing thresholds for quantitative PPL determination improved agreement rates, with peak agreements at H/Ma count differences of six for mild NPDR, five for moderate NPDR, and nine for severe NPDR-PDR. Based on ultrawide field device type (California = 412 eyes vs. 200Tx = 379 eyes), agreement between qualitative and quantitative PPL grading was moderate for all DR severities in both devices (ĸ = 0.369-0.526, P < 0.001) except for mild NPDR on the 200Tx, which had poor agreement (ĸ = 0.055, P = 0.478). Conclusions: Determination of PPL varies between standard qualitative and quantitative grading and is dependent on NPDR severity, device type, and magnitude of lesion differences used for quantitative assessment. Translational Relevance: Prior UWF studies have not accounted for imaging and grading factors that affect PPL, such factors need to be reviewed when assessing thresholds for DR progression rates.

Comparison of Nondiabetic Retinal Findings Identified With Nonmydriatic Fundus Photography vs Ultrawide Field Imaging in an Ocular Telehealth Program.

IMPORTANCE: Ultrawide field imaging (UWFI) is increasingly being used in teleophthalmology settings. Given the greater area of the retina imaged, we evaluated the ability of UWFI vs nonmydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) to detect nondiabetic retinal findings in a teleophthalmology program. OBSERVATION: We conducted a retrospective single-center comparative cohort study from January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2013, imaging 3864 and 3971 consecutive teleophthalmology patients (7728 and 7942 eyes) using NMFP and UWFI, respectively. Standard diabetic retinopathy evaluation and nondiabetic findings were compared between the 2 imaging modalities. In patients without diabetic retinopathy (2243 by NMFP and 2252 by UWFI), the rate of identification of nondiabetic findings by NMFP (451 patients [20.1%]) and UWFI (490 [21.8%]) were comparable (P = .19). Ultrawide field imaging increased the identification of choroidal nevi by 27% (406 eyes [5.3%] by NMFP vs 545 eyes [6.9%] by UWFI; P < .001) and chorioretinal atrophy or scarring by 116% (50 eyes [0.6%] by NMFP vs 101 eyes [1.3%] by UWFI; P < .001). No peripheral retinal findings were identified with NMFP, while UWFI detected 25 retinal tears (0.3%; P < .001), 54 lattice and peripheral degenerations (0.7%; P < .001), and 142 cases of vitreous detachment or floaters (1.8%; P < .001). Data analysis was performed from November 1, 2013, to May 1, 2014. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In eyes without diabetic retinopathy, approximately 20% may have ocular findings identified on retinal imaging, which emphasizes the role of retinal imaging in patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2 regardless of the severity of retinopathy. In this cohort, UWFI increased the identification of peripheral retinal and vitreous pathologic findings.

Real-Time Ultrawide Field Image Evaluation of Retinopathy in a Diabetes Telemedicine Program.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of trained nonphysician retinal imagers to perform diabetic retinopathy (DR) evaluation at the time of ultrawide field retinal (UWF) imaging in a teleophthalmology program. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Clinic patients with diabetes received Joslin Vision Network protocol retinal imaging as part of their standard medical care. Retinal imagers evaluated UWF images for referable DR at the time of image capture. Training of the imagers included 4 h of standardized didactic lectures and 12 h of guided image review. Real-time evaluations were compared with standard masked gradings performed at a centralized reading center. RESULTS: A total of 3,978 eyes of 1,989 consecutive patients were imaged and evaluated. By reading center evaluation, 3,769 eyes (94.7%) were gradable for DR, 1,376 (36.5%) had DR, and 580 (15.3%) had referable DR. Compared with the reading center, real-time image evaluation had a sensitivity and specificity for identifying more than minimal DR of 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.97) and 0.84 (0.82-0.85), respectively, and 0.99 (0.97-1.00) and 0.76 (0.75-0.78), respectively, for detecting referable DR. Only three patients with referable DR were not identified by imager evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care evaluation of UWF images by nonphysician imagers following standardized acquisition and evaluation protocols within an established teleophthalmology program had good sensitivity and specificity for detection of DR and for identification of referable retinal disease. With immediate image evaluation, <0.1% of patients with referable DR would be missed, reading center image grading burden would be reduced by 60%, and patient feedback would be expedited.

Potential efficiency benefits of nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging in an ocular telehealth diabetic retinopathy program.

OBJECTIVE To compare efficiency of nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging (UWFI) and nonmydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) in a diabetic retinopathy (DR) ocular telehealth program. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients in this retrospective, comparative cohort study underwent NMFP and UWFI between 1 November 2011 and 1 November 2012. Images were evaluated for DR and diabetic macular edema (DME) by certified graders using a standard protocol at a centralized reading center. Identification of DR, image evaluation time, and rate of ungradable eyes were compared. RESULTS NMFP and UWFI were performed in 1,633 and 2,170 consecutive patients, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between groups regarding age, diabetes duration, sex, ethnicity, or insulin use. The ungradable rate per patient for DR (2.9 vs. 9.9%, P < 0.0001) and DME (3.8 vs. 8.8%, P < 0.0001) was lower with UWFI than with NMFP. With UWFI, the median image evaluation time per patient was reduced from 12.8 to 9.2 min (P < 0.0001). The identification of patients with DR (38.4 vs. 33.8%) and vision-threatening DR (14.5 vs. 11.9%) was increased with UWFI versus NMFP. In a consecutive subgroup of 502 eyes of 301 patients with DR, the distribution of peripheral retinal lesions outside Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study fields suggested a more severe DR level in 9.0% (45 eyes). CONCLUSIONS In a standardized DR ocular telehealth program, nonmydriatic UWFI reduced the ungradable rate by 71% (to <3%) and reduced image evaluation time by 28%. DR was identified 17% more frequently after UWFI, and DR peripheral lesions suggested a more severe DR level in 9%. These data suggest that UWFI may improve efficiency of ocular telehealth programs evaluating DR and DME.

Imager evaluation of diabetic retinopathy at the time of imaging in a telemedicine program.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of certified retinal imagers to identify presence versus absence of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (stDR) (moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy or worse or diabetic macular edema) at the time of retinal imaging in a telemedicine program. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Diabetic patients in a primary care setting or specialty diabetes clinic received Joslin Vision Network protocol retinal imaging as part of their care. Trained nonphysician imagers graded the presence versus absence of stDR at the time of imaging. These gradings were compared with masked gradings of certified readers. RESULTS: Of 158 patients (316 eyes) imaged, all cases of stDR (42 eyes [13%]) were identified by the imagers at the time of imaging. Six eyes with mild nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy were graded by the imagers to have stDR (sensitivity 1.00, 95% CI 0.90-1.00; specificity 0.97, 0.94-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriately trained imagers can accurately identify stDR at the time of imaging.