National variations in retinopathy of prematurity screening criteria in Canada: existent guidelines and actual practice patterns

Inappropriate use of clinical practices in Canada: a systematic review

Background:

Inappropriate health care leads to negative patient experiences, poor health outcomes and inefficient use of resources. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada.

Methods:

We searched multiple bibliometric databases and grey literature to identify inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada between 2007 and 2021. Two team members independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Findings were synthesized in 2 categories: diagnostics and therapeutics. We reported ranges of proportions of inappropriate use for all practices. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), based on the percentage of patients not receiving recommended practices (underuse) or receiving practices not recommended (overuse), were calculated. All statistics are at the study summary level.

Results:

We included 174 studies, representing 228 clinical practices and 28 900 762 patients. The median proportion of inappropriate care, as assessed in the studies, was 30.0% (IQR 12.0%–56.6%). Underuse (median 43.9%, IQR 23.8%–66.3%) was more frequent than overuse (median 13.6%, IQR 3.2%–30.7%). The most frequently investigated diagnostics were glycated hemoglobin (underused, range 18.0%–85.7%, n = 9) and thyroid-stimulating hormone (overused, range 3.0%–35.1%, n = 5). The most frequently investigated therapeutics were statin medications (underused, range 18.5%–71.0%, n = 6) and potentially inappropriate medications (overused, range 13.5%–97.3%, n = 9).

Interpretation:

We have provided a summary of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canadian health care systems. Our findings can be used to support health care professionals and quality agencies to improve patient care and safety in Canada.

Trends in the Screening and Treatment of Retinopathy of Prematurity

OBJECTIVES

To determine the current practice patterns of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and treatment and the attitudes toward new screening and treatment modalities in level III and level IV NICUs, as reported by medical directors.

METHODS

Surveys were mailed to the medical directors of 847 level III NICUs identified in the 2011 American Academy of Pediatrics directory in April 2015. In September 2015, responses were compared with American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines and previous reports. Within-sample comparisons were made by level, setting, size, and academic status.

RESULTS

Respondents indicated that ROP screening is most often performed in their NICUs by pediatric and/or retina specialists (90%); retinal imaging devices are infrequently used (21%). Treatment is performed by pediatric (39%) and/or retina (57%) specialists in the NICU, usually under conscious sedation (60%). The most common treatment modality was laser photocoagulation (85%), followed by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injection (20%). Some NICUs do not provide treatment services (28%), often due to a lack of ophthalmologists (78%). Respondents showed slightly more agreement (35%) than disagreement (25%) that a retinal imaging device could replace indirect ophthalmoscopy (40% were neutral). More respondents agreed than disagreed (30% vs 15%) that telemedicine for ROP screening is safe, but most were neutral (55%).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening and treatment of ROP are not implemented uniformly in NICUs across the United States. Concerns regarding an insufficient ROP workforce are validated.

Adequacy of published screening criteria for retinopathy of prematurity

BACKGROUND

Criteria for screening preterm infants for retinopathy of prematurity vary around the world. We aimed to analyse the efficacy of alternative screening criteria.

DESIGN

We collected retrospective data at a tertiary level neonatal nursery.

PARTICIPANTS

Our participants were 1007 babies, born between 1997 and 2011, at <32 weeks gestational age or <1500 g birth weight (as recommended by the National Health and Medical Research Council in 1996), who had completed follow-up to full retinal vascularization, with defined presence or absence of retinopathy of prematurity.

METHODS

We determined whether disease would be detected using an alternative Australian screening model (gestational age <30 weeks or birth weight <1250 g) or screening criteria utilized in developed countries with similar standards of neonatal care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Detection of retinopathy of prematurity is our main outcome.

RESULTS

Using several of the alternative criteria, two neonates with clinically significant retinopathy of prematurity, one of whom required laser treatment to preserve sight, would not have been screened, and their disease may have gone undetected. Use of <30 weeks gestational age or <1500 g birth weight as the criteria would still have screened these infants but would have reduced the number of infants screened by 24.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Some commonly utilized international screening criteria for retinopathy of prematurity may risk clinically significant cases being missed and others may screen babies unnecessarily. Alternative criteria should be considered and '<30 weeks gestational age and/or <1500 g birth weight' appears a viable option.

Preterm-associated visual impairment and estimates of retinopathy of prematurity at regional and global levels for 2010

BACKGROUND

Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a leading cause of potentially avoidable childhood blindness worldwide. We estimated ROP burden at the global and regional levels to inform screening and treatment programs, research, and data priorities.

METHODS

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were undertaken to estimate the risk of ROP and subsequent visual impairment for surviving preterm babies by level of neonatal care, access to ROP screening, and treatment. A compartmental model was used to estimate ROP cases and numbers of visually impaired survivors.

RESULTS

In 2010, an estimated 184,700 (uncertainty range: 169,600-214,500) preterm babies developed any stage of ROP, 20,000 (15,500-27,200) of whom became blind or severely visually impaired from ROP, and a further 12,300 (8,300-18,400) developed mild/moderate visual impairment. Sixty-five percent of those visually impaired from ROP were born in middle-income regions; 6.2% (4.3-8.9%) of all ROP visually impaired infants were born at >32-wk gestation. Visual impairment from other conditions associated with preterm birth will affect larger numbers of survivors.

CONCLUSION

Improved care, including oxygen delivery and monitoring, for preterm babies in all facility settings would reduce the number of babies affected with ROP. Improved data tracking and coverage of locally adapted screening/treatment programs are urgently required.