Influence of primary care practices on patients' uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening: a qualitative case study

Exploring Whether and How People Experiencing High Deprivation Access Diagnostic Services: A Qualitative Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

To contribute to addressing diagnostic health inequalities in the United Kingdom, this review aimed to investigate determinants of diagnostic service use amongst people experiencing high deprivation in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using three databases (EBSCO, Web of Science and SCOPUS) to search studies pertaining to diagnostic service use amongst people experiencing high deprivation. Search terms related to diagnostics, barriers and facilitators to access and deprivation. Articles were included if they discussed facilitators and/or barriers to diagnostic service access, contained participants' direct perspectives and focussed on individuals experiencing high deprivation in the United Kingdom. Articles were excluded if the full text was unretrievable, only abstracts were available, the research did not focus on adults experiencing high deprivation in the United Kingdom, those not including participants' direct perspectives (e.g., quantitative studies) and papers unavailable in English.

RESULTS

Of 14,717 initial papers, 18 were included in the final review. Determinants were grouped into three themes (Beliefs and Behaviours, Emotional and Psychological Factors and Practical Factors), made up of 15 sub-themes. These were mapped to a conceptual model, which illustrates that Beliefs and Behaviours interact with Emotional and Psychological Factors to influence Motivation to access diagnostic services. Motivation then influences and is influenced by Practical Factors, resulting in a Decision to Access or Not. This decision influences Beliefs and Behaviours and/or Emotional and Psychological Factors such that the cycle begins again.

CONCLUSION

Decision-making regarding diagnostic service use for people experiencing high deprivation in the United Kingdom is complex. The conceptual model illustrates this complexity, as well as the mediative, interactive and iterative nature of the process. The model should be applied in policy and practice to enable understanding of the factors influencing access to diagnostic services and to design interventions that address identified determinants.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Consulting lived experience experts was imperative in understanding whether and how the existing literature captures the lived experience of those experiencing high deprivation in South England. The model was presented to lived experience experts, who corroborated findings, highlighted significant factors for them and introduced issues that were not identified in the review.

Implementation of a Teleophthalmology Screening Program for Diabetic Retinopathy in New York City

Purpose: To examine the implementation of a teleophthalmology program for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening at a metropolitan hospital system and identify the challenges that the clinical teams encountered using the program. Methods: The study was conducted in 2 parts. The first was a pilot retrospective chart review of 300 consecutive patients screened for DR by the teleophthalmology screening program. The baseline variables, DR capture rate and staging, and continuity of care for those diagnosed with DR were analyzed. The second was a web-based survey identifying the barriers encountered by 36 physicians and clinical staff as they participated in the teleophthalmology screening program. Results: Part 1: Of the patients evaluated, 57 (19.0%) were diagnosed with DR; 42 (73.7%) had mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 7 (12.3%) had moderate NPDR, none had severe NPDR, and 8 (14.0%) had PDR. Thirty-one patients (54.4%) with retinopathy diagnoses were referred for an in-person follow-up at the clinic while the rest continued monitoring via the program. Of this subset, 22 (71.0%) completed the follow-up visit. Part 2: The survey respondents comprised 28 physicians (77.8%), 6 licensed nurse practitioners (16.7%), and 2 medical assistants (5.6%). Twenty-two providers (71.0%) preferred initiating referrals for in-person annual examinations over teleophthalmology screening referrals. The most common barriers described were related to workflow interruption, time constraints, and staff shortages. Conclusions: The teleophthalmology DR screening program allowed identification of early or absent DR at clinics in an urban setting (New York City). The findings suggest areas for targeted improvement in the screening program to better complement internal referral practices' workflows.

Patient, family member, and health care provider perspective on barriers and facilitators to diabetic retinopathy screening in Thailand: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) can cause significant visual impairment which can be largely avoided by early detection through proper screening and treatment. People with DR face a number of challenges from early detection to treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate factors that influence DR screening in Thailand and to identify barriers to follow-up compliance from patient, family member, and health care provider (HCP) perspectives.

METHODS

A total of 15 focus group discussions (FGDs) were held, each with five to twelve participants. There were three distinct stakeholders: diabetic patients (n = 47) presenting to a diabetic retinopathy clinic in Thailand, their family members (n = 41), and health care providers (n = 34). All focus group conversations were transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to examine textual material.

RESULTS

Different themes emerged from the FGD on knowledge about diabetes, self-care behaviors of diabetes mellitus (DM), awareness about DR, barriers to DR screening, and the suggested solutions to address those barriers. Data showed lower knowledge and awareness about diabetes and DR in both patients and family members. Long waiting times, financial issues, and lack of a person to accompany appointments were identified as the major deterrents for attending DR screening. Family support for patients was found to vary widely, with some patients reporting to have received adequate support while others reported having received minimal support. Even though insurance covered the cost of attending diabetes/DR screening program, some patients did not show up for their appointments.

CONCLUSION

Patients need to be well-informed about the asymptomatic nature of diabetes and DR. Communication at the patient level and shared decision-making with HCPs are essential. Family members and non-physician clinicians (such as diabetes nurses, diabetes educators, physician assistants) who work in the field of diabetes play a vital role in encouraging patients to attend diabetes and DR follow-ups visits regularly.

Enablers and barriers to diabetic retinopathy eye care among first nations and Métis women

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is increasingly prevalent in Indigenous women and increases their risk of developing diabetic retinopathy, an eye complication of diabetes and a common cause of vision loss in Canada, especially among adults. Early detection is the most effective approach to prevent vision loss and reduce the impact of diabetic retinopathy.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined enablers and barriers that influence the diabetes eye care behaviour of First Nations and Métis women with diabetes and at risk of diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive qualitative study with 35 First Nations and Métis women with diabetes or at risk of diabetes in Saskatoon, Canada. Data were collected via four sharing circle discussions and were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The study findings showed that understanding of diabetes eye care access and cost, and unsupportive interactions with health care practitioners, were barriers to diabetic retinopathy care behaviour. Conversely, the presence of eye complications, participants' resolve to manage diabetes, self-efficacy and fear due to experiences of family members with diabetes enabled diabetes eye care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study advances knowledge in socio-cultural factors influencing diabetic retinopathy care behaviour among First Nations and Métis women living with and at risk of diabetes. The study shows the need for further public health and health system interventions to address barriers and support Indigenous peoples with or at risk of diabetes to make informed health decisions.

Barriers and enablers to diabetic eye screening attendance: An interview study with young adults with type 1 diabetes

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify barriers and enablers of diabetic eye screening (DES) attendance amongst young adults with diabetes living in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Semistructured qualitative interviews with adults aged 18-34 years with diabetes. Participants were purposively sampled to aim for representation across gender, geographical locations, diabetes type, years since diabetes diagnosis and patterns of attendance (i.e. regular attenders, occasional non-attenders, regular non-attenders). Data were collected and analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore potential individual, sociocultural and environmental influences on attendance. Data were analysed using a combined deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach. Barriers/enablers were mapped to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to identify potential strategies to increase attendance.

RESULTS

Key barriers to attendance reported by the sample of 29 study participants with type 1 diabetes, fell within the TDF domains: [Knowledge] (e.g. not understanding reasons for attending DES or treatments available if diabetic retinopathy is detected), [Social Influences] (e.g. lack of support following DES results), [Social role and Identity] (e.g. not knowing other people their age with diabetes, feeling 'isolated' and being reluctant to disclose their diabetes) and [Environmental Context and Resources] (e.g. lack of appointment flexibility and options for rescheduling). Enablers included: [Social Influences] (e.g. support of family/diabetes team), [Goals] (e.g. DES regarded as 'high priority'). Many of the reported barriers/enablers were consistent across groups. Potential BCTs to support attendance include Instructions on how to perform the behaviour; Information about health consequences; Social support (practical) and Social comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

Attendance to diabetic eye screening in young adults is influenced by a complex set of interacting factors. Identification of potentially modifiable target behaviours provides a basis for designing more effective, tailored interventions to help young adults regularly attend eye screening and prevent avoidable vision loss.

Factors Associated With Nonattendance in a Nationwide Screening Program for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Register-Based Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify factors associated with nonattendance in a Danish nationwide screening program for diabetic retinopathy among people with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study linking individual-level register data was performed. First, we compared characteristics of 156,878 people with type 2 diabetes divided into attenders and never-attenders on the basis of their screening history over a 6-year period. Second, we assessed 230,173 screening intervals within the same 6-year period. Mixed-effects models were used to investigate the effect of sociodemographic and health-related factors on the likelihood of having a nonattender interval (i.e., failing to attend screening within the recommended interval).

RESULTS

A total of 42,068 (26.8%) people were identified as never-attenders, having no registered eye screening over a 6-year period. Compared with attenders, never-attenders were more frequently divorced/widowed, lived in the Capital Region of Denmark, and had poorer health. A total of 62,381 (27.1%) screening intervals were identified as nonattender intervals. Both sociodemographic and health-related factors were significantly associated with the likelihood of having a nonattender interval. The largest odds ratios for nonattendance were seen for mental illness, nonwestern descent, divorce, comorbidity, and place of residence.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that never- and nonattendance of screening for diabetic retinopathy are more common among people who are divorced/widowed and of poorer health. Additionally, nonattendance is more frequent among people of nonwestern decent. These population subgroups may benefit from targeted interventions aimed at increasing participation in diabetic retinopathy screening.

Barriers and facilitators to diabetic retinopathy screening within Australian primary care

Background

Despite recent incentives through Medicare (Australia’s universal health insurance scheme) to increase retinal screening rates in primary care, comprehensive diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening has not been reached in Australia. The current study aimed to identify key factors affecting the delivery of diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in Australian general practices.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative study involving in-depth interviews was carried out from November 2019 to March 2020. Using purposive snowballing sampling, 15 general practitioners (GPs) were recruited from urban and rural general practices in New South Wales and Western Australia. A semi-structured interview guide was used to collect data from participants. All interviews were conducted over the phone by one facilitator, and each interview lasted up to 45 min. The Socio-Ecological Model was used to inform the content of the interview topic guides and subsequent data analysis. Recorded data were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was conducted to identify and classify recurrent themes.

Results

Of 15 GPs interviewed, 13 were male doctors, and the mean age was 54.7 ± 15.5 years. Seven participants were practising in urban areas, while eight were practising in regional or remote areas. All participants had access to a direct ophthalmoscope, but none owned retinal cameras. None of the participants reported performing DR screening. Only three participants were aware of the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items 12,325 and 12,326 that allow GPs to bill for retinal screening. Seven themes, a combination of facilitators and barriers, emerged from interviews with the GPs. Despite the strong belief in their role in managing chronic diseases, barriers such as costs of retinal cameras, time constraints, lack of skills to make DR diagnosis, and unawareness of Medicare incentives for non-mydriatic retinal photography made it difficult to conduct DR screening in general practice. However, several enabling strategies to deliver DR screening within primary care include increasing GPs’ access to continuing professional development, subsidising the cost of retinal cameras, and the need for a champion ace to take the responsibility of retinal photography.

Conclusion

This study identified essential areas at the system level that require addressing to promote the broader implementation of DR screening, in particular, a nationwide awareness campaign to maximise the use of MBS items, improve GPs’ competency, and subsidise costs of the retinal cameras for small and rural general practices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01586-7.

Effect of ethnicity and other sociodemographic factors on attendance at diabetic eye screening: a 12-month retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To examine the association of sociodemographic characteristics with attendance at diabetic eye screening in a large ethnically diverse urban population.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Screening visits in the North East London Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (NELDESP).

PARTICIPANTS

84 449 people with diabetes aged 12 years or older registered in the NELDESP and scheduled for screening between 1 April 2017 and 31 March 2018.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Attendance at diabetic eye screening appointments.

RESULTS

The mean age of people with diabetes was 60 years (SD 14.2 years), 53.4% were men, 41% South Asian, 29% White British and 17% Black; 83.4% attended screening. Black people with diabetes had similar levels of attendance compared with White British people. However, South Asian, Chinese and 'Any other Asian' background ethnicities showed greater odds of attendance compared with White British. When compared with their respective reference group, high levels of deprivation, younger age, longer duration of diabetes and worse visual acuity, were all associated with non-attendance. There was a higher likelihood of attendance per quintile improvement in deprivation (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.08), with increasing age (OR per decade, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.19), with better visual acuity (OR per Bailey-Lovie chart line 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.14) and with longer time of NELDESP registration (OR per year, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.03).

CONCLUSION

Ethnic differences in diabetic eye screening uptake, though small, are evident. Despite preconceptions, a higher likelihood of screening attendance was observed among Asian ethnic groups when compared with the White ethnic group. Poorer socioeconomic profile was associated with higher likelihood of non-attendance for screening. Further work is needed to understand how to target individuals at risk of non-attendance and reduce inequalities.

Characteristics of repeat non-attenders at Diabetes Eye Screening Wales, a national community-based diabetes-related retinopathy screening service, during 2003-2018

AIMS

To understand factors associated with repeat non-attendance at screening for diabetes-related retinopathy.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study using anonymised data from Diabetic Eye Screening Wales for people with a full history of screening invitations and attendances was linked with primary and secondary care records held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Repeat non-attendance was defined as no record of attendance during any 36-month period despite three cycles of annual screening invitations. The associations between repeat non-attendance and potential risk factors were examined using multivariable logistic regression analysis, stratified according to type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

A total of 18% with type 1 diabetes (1146/6513) and 8% with type 2 diabetes (12,475/156,525) were repeat non-attenders. Participants attending their very first appointment were least likely to become repeat non-attenders [odds ratio (95% confidence interval)]: type 1 diabetes: 0.12 (0.09, 0.17) and type 2 diabetes: 0.08 (0.07, 0.09). For both types of diabetes, those of a younger age, living in areas of higher deprivation and subject to multiple house moves were at greater risk of becoming repeat non-attenders.

CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATION

A more tailored approach is needed for the younger population, those living in areas of higher deprivation and/or undergoing multiple residential relocation and to ensure attendance at their initial appointment to minimise future repeat non-attendance.

Five regions, five retinopathy screening programmes: a systematic review of how Portugal addresses the challenge

BACKGROUND

The implementation of a population-based screening programme for diabetic retinopathy involves several challenges, often leading to postponements and setbacks at high human and material costs. Thus, it is of the utmost importance to promote the sharing of experiences, successes, and difficulties. However, factors such as the existence of regional programmes, specificities of each country's health systems, organisational and even linguistic barriers, make it difficult to create a solid framework that can be used as a basis for future projects.

METHODS

Web of Science and PubMed platforms were searched using appropriate key words. The review process resulted in 423 articles adherent to the search criteria, 28 of which were accepted and analysed. Web sites of all Portuguese governmental and non-governmental organisations, with a relevant role on the research topic, were inspected and 75 official documents were retrieved and analysed.

RESULTS

Since 2001, five regional screening programmes were gradually implemented under the guidelines of Portuguese General Health Department. However, complete population coverage was still not achieved. Among the main difficulties reported are the complex articulation between different levels of care providers, the low number of orthoptic technician in the national health system, the high burden that images grading, and treatment of positive cases represents for hospitals ophthalmology services, and low adherence rates. Yet, the comparison between strategies adopted in the different regions allowed the identification of potential solutions: hire orthoptic technician for primary health care units, eliminating the dependence of hospital professionals; use artificial intelligence algorithms for automatic retinographies grading, avoiding ophthalmologists overload; adoption of proximity strategies, as the use of portable retinographers, to promote adherence to screening.

CONCLUSION

Access to diabetic retinopathy screening remains remarkably variable in Portugal and needs urgent attention. However, several characteristics of effective screening programmes were found in Portuguese screening programmes, what seems to point toward promising outcomes, especially if each other highlights are considered. The findings of this research could be very useful for the other countries with similar socio-political characteristics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration ID CRD42020200115 .

Diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular oedema pathways and management: UK Consensus Working Group

The management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) has evolved considerably over the past decade, with the availability of new technologies (diagnostic and therapeutic). As such, the existing Royal College of Ophthalmologists DR Guidelines (2013) are outdated, and to the best of our knowledge are not under revision at present. Furthermore, there are no other UK guidelines covering all available treatments, and there seems to be significant variation around the UK in the management of diabetic macular oedema (DMO). This manuscript provides a summary of reviews the pathogenesis of DR and DMO, including role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and non-VEGF cytokines, clinical grading/classification of DMO vis a vis current terminology (of centre-involving [CI-DMO], or non-centre involving [nCI-DMO], systemic risks and their management). The excellent UK DR Screening (DRS) service has continued to evolve and remains world-leading. However, challenges remain, as there are significant variations in equipment used, and reproducible standards of DMO screening nationally. The interphase between DRS and the hospital eye service can only be strengthened with further improvements. The role of modern technology including optical coherence tomography (OCT) and wide-field imaging, and working practices including virtual clinics and their potential in increasing clinic capacity and improving patient experiences and outcomes are discussed. Similarly, potential roles of home monitoring in diabetic eyes in the future are explored. The role of pharmacological (intravitreal injections [IVT] of anti-VEGFs and steroids) and laser therapies are summarised. Generally, IVT anti-VEGF are offered as first line pharmacologic therapy. As requirements of diabetic patients in particular patient groups may vary, including pregnant women, children, and persons with learning difficulties, it is important that DR management is personalised in such particular patient groups. First choice therapy needs to be individualised in these cases and may be intravitreal steroids rather than the standard choice of anti-VEGF agents. Some of these, but not all, are discussed in this document.

Factors associated with non-attendance in the Irish national diabetic retinopathy screening programme (INDEAR study report no. 2)

AIMS

We aimed to determine the patient and screening-level factors that are associated with non-attendance in the Irish National Diabetic Retinal screening programme (Diabetic RetinaScreen). To accomplish this, we modelled a selection of predictors derived from the historical screening records of patients with diabetes.

METHODS

In this cohort study, appointment data from the national diabetic retinopathy screening programme (RetinaScreen) were extracted and augmented using publicly available meteorological and geospatial data. A total of 653,969 appointments from 158,655 patients were included for analysis. Mixed-effects models (univariable and multivariable) were used to estimate the influence of several variables on non-attendance to screening appointments.

RESULTS

All variables considered for analysis were statistically significant. Variables of note, with meaningful effect, were age (OR: 1.23 per decade away from 70; 95% CI: [1.22-1.24]), type 2 diabetes (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: [1.06-1.14]) and socio-economic deprivation (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: [1.09-1.16]). A majority (52%) of missed appointments were from patients who had missed three or more appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to outline factors that are associated with non-attendance within the Irish national diabetic retinopathy screening service. In particular, when corrected for age and other factors, patients with type 2 diabetes had higher rates of non-attendance. Additionally, this is the first study of any diabetic screening programme to demonstrate that weather may influence attendance. This research provides unique insight to guide the implementation of an optimal and cost-effective intervention strategy to improve attendance.

Socioeconomic status is not associated with the delivery of care in people with diabetes but does modify HbA1c levels: An observational cohort study (Elzha-cohort 1)

BACKGROUND

Structured primary diabetes care within a collectively supported setting is associated with better monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle-related target indicators amongst people with type 2 diabetes and with better HbA1c levels. Whether socioeconomic status affects the delivery of care in terms of monitoring and its association with HbA1c levels within this approach, is unclear. This study aims to understand whether, within a structured care approach, (1) socioeconomic categories differ concerning diabetes monitoring as recommended; (2) socioeconomic status modifies the association between monitoring as recommended and HbA1c.

METHODS

Observational real-life cohort study with primary care registry data from general practitioners within diverse socioeconomic areas, who are supported with the implementation of structured diabetes care. People with type 2 diabetes mellitus were offered quarterly diabetes consultations. "Monitoring as recommended" by professional guidelines implied minimally one annual registration of HbA1c, systolic blood pressure, LDL, BMI, smoking behaviour and physical activity. Regarding socioeconomic status, deprived, advantageous urban and advantageous suburban categories were compared to the intermediate category concerning (a) recommended monitoring; (b) association between recommended monitoring and HbA1c.

RESULTS

Aim 1 (n = 13 601 people): Compared to the intermediate socioeconomic category, no significant differences in odds of being monitored as recommended were found in the deprived (OR 0.45 (95% CI 0.19-1.08)), advantageous urban (OR 1.27 (95% CI 0.46-3.54)) and advantageous suburban (OR 2.32 (95% CI 0.88-6.08)) categories. Aim 2 (n = 11 164 people): People with recommended monitoring had significantly lower HbA1c levels than incompletely monitored people (-2.4 (95% CI -2.9; -1.8) mmol/mol). SES modified monitoring-related HbA1c differences, which were significantly higher in the deprived (-3.3 (95% CI -4.3; -2.4) mmol/mol) than the intermediate category (-1.3 (95% CI -2.2; -0.4) mmol/mol).

CONCLUSIONS

Within a structured diabetes care setting, socioeconomic status is not associated with recommended monitoring. Socioeconomic differences in the association between recommended monitoring and HbA1c levels advocate further exploration of practice and patient-related factors contributing to appropriate monitoring and for care adjustment to population needs.

Diabetic Retinopathy Screening: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Literature

OBJECTIVES

Diabetic retinopathy is a common microvascular complication that leads to vision loss. Despite national and international organizations developing guidelines for diabetic retinopathy screening, patients with diabetes remain unscreened. Our aim was to understand facilitators and barriers influencing diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and to examine factors that promote program success.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from inception until September 23, 2019 were used for data collection. Studies were included if they were original qualitative research articles, included adults >18 years of age and assessed diabetic retinopathy screening programs or retinopathy screening as a component of a general diabetes care program. A "best-fit" framework synthesis methodology was used for this analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine articles involving 1,433 participants were identified. Six themes of barriers to, and facilitators of, diabetic retinopathy screening were identified, including access to screening, knowledge and information sharing, training and skills competency, service delivery, cultural competency and psychological factors. Cost and competing interests were common barriers to access; lack of knowledge about screening services was also a frequently reported barrier. Both patients and providers identified the need for improved service delivery, especially the referral and follow-up process. Providers recognized the need for additional training, patients enumerated several psychological barriers to screening uptake and cultural considerations were believed to be important, particularly among indigenous communities.

CONCLUSIONS

To improve screening uptake, the identified challenges must be addressed while also reinforcing the facilitators. Furthermore, program administrators could model new and unsuccessful screening programs after the successful ones while also considering local peculiarities.

Diabetic retinopathy screening barriers among Palestinian primary health care patients: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) screening among Palestinian diabetic patients is limited. To improve the care of our patients, we explored the barriers to DR screening with a qualitative study.

METHODS

Three focus groups were conducted in the northern West Bank. Patients noncompliant with DR screening were recruited from Primary Health Care clinics. Questions were adapted from similar published studies. Informed consent was obtained and group discussions were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes by three researchers.

RESULTS

Most patients reported financial barriers including the costs of the exam and additional treatments, and transportation to the referral clinic. System related issues were the difficulty of getting appointments and long wait times due to inadequate numbers of ophthalmologists or screening facilities, and physicians failing to recommend screening. Personal concerns related to patients having other priorities, fears about the results, and the negative experiences of family members. Finally, cultural aspects included the stigma of wearing glasses and not doing a test for a condition without symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to completing retinopathy screening are multidimensional with financial, personal, educational, health system, and cultural factors. These should be taken into consideration by policy makers in order to increase the uptake and quality of service.

Knowledge about diabetic retinopathy, eye check-up practice and associated factors among adult patients with diabetes mellitus attending at debark hospital, Northwest Ethiopia

Background

Routine eye examination plays a vital role in detecting diabetic retinopathy in its earliest stage before the onset of blindness. Patients’ knowledge about the nature and the consequences of diabetic retinopathy and routine eye checkup helps for timely identification and early treatment. However, there is limited evidence on knowledge of patients with diabetes mellitus on diabetic retinopathy and their eye check-up practices in Ethiopia.

The aim of this study was to assess knowledge about diabetic retinopathy, eye check-up practice and associated factors of diabetic retinopathy among adult diabetic patients at Debark hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.

Methods

Institution based cross-sectional study was conducted at Debark hospital, Northwest Ethiopia, from April 20/2018- May 20/2018. A pretested interviewer administered structured questionnaire was used to collect data among 230 diabetic patients aged 18 years and above. Data were entered in to Epi Info version 7 and exported to SPSS version 20 for analysis. Bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were done. Odds ratio with 95% confidence level was determined and variables with p–value of < 0.05 were considered as statistically significant.

Result

Out of 238 sample 230 were participated, among this, 119 (51.7%) were males. The mean age of the respondents was 49 (SD ±17.6) years. One hundred nine (47.4%) participants had good knowledge and 91 (39.6%) had good eye check-up practice. Urban residence [AOR = 2.65;95% CI: 1.16–6.07)]), monthly income of 3501–8000 birr [AOR = 4.54;(1.31–15.7)], type II diabetes mellitus [AOR = 3.9;(1.6–9.6)], duration of diabetes (6–12 years [AOR = 4.4;(1.4–13.5)]), history of eye disease [AOR = 5.5;(2.3–13.0)] were associated with good knowledge. Similarly, longer duration of diabetes (13–25 years [AOR = 3.77; (1.05–13.5)]) and history of eye disease [AOR = 2.47; (1.09–5.62)] were associated with good eye check-up practice.

Conclusion

The proportion of good knowledge about diabetic retinopathy among diabetic patients at Debark hospital was fair (47.4%) and good eye check-up practice (eye examination at least once in the past year) was low (39.6%). Longer duration of diabetes and history of eye disease were identified as positive factors for good knowledge and eye check-up practice. Knowledge and regular eye check-up practice needs to be enhanced through provision of appropriate health education.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12886-020-01730-4.

Evaluation of a hospital-based integrated model of eye care for diabetic retinopathy assessment: a multimethod study

OBJECTIVES

Diabetic eye disease is a leading cause of blindness but can be mitigated by regular eye assessment. A framework of issues, developed from the literature of barriers to eye assessment, was used to structure an examination of perceptions of a new model of care for diabetic retinopathy from the perspective of staff using the model, and health professionals referring patients to the new service.

DESIGN

Multimethod: interviews and focus groups, and a separate survey.

SETTING

A new clinic based on an integrated model of care was established at a hospital in outer metropolitan Sydney, Australia in 2017. Funded jointly by Centre for Eye Health (CFEH) and the hospital, the clinic was equipped and staffed by optometrists who work alongside the ophthalmologists in the existing hospital eye clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Five (of seven) hospital staff working in the clinic (ophthalmologists and administrative officers) or referring to it from other departments (endocrinologists); nine optometrists from CFEH who developed or worked in the clinic; 10 community-based optometrists as potential referrers.

RESULTS

The new clinic was considered to have addressed known barriers to eye assessment, including access, assistance for patients unable/unwilling to organise eye checks and efficient management of human resources. The clinic optimised known drivers of this model of care: providing clear scope of practice and protocols for shared care between optometrists and ophthalmologists, good communication between referrers and eye professionals and a collegial approach promoting interprofessional trust. Remaining areas of concern were few referrals from general practitioners, fewer referrals from hospital endocrinologists than expected and issues with stretched administrative capacity. There were also perceived mismatches between the priorities of hospital management and aims of the clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

The new model was considered to have addressed many of the barriers to assessment. While there remain issues with the model, there were also unexpected benefits.

'I've always done what I was told by the medical people': a qualitative study of the reasons why older adults attend multifactorial falls risk assessments mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework

OBJECTIVES

Multifactorial falls risk assessments reduce the rate of falls in older people and are recommended by international guidelines. Despite their effectiveness, their potential impact is often constrained by barriers to implementation. Attendance is an issue. The aim of this study was to explore why older people attend community-based multifactorial falls risk assessment clinics, and to map these reasons to a theoretical framework.

DESIGN

This is a qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed thematically. Each theme and subtheme were then mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify the determinants of behaviour.

PARTICIPANTS

Older adults (aged 60 and over) who attended community-based multifactorial falls risk assessments.

RESULTS

Sixteen interviews were conducted. Three main themes explained participants' reasons for attending the multifactorial risk assessment; being that 'type of person', being 'linked in' with health and community services and having 'strong social support'. Six other themes were identified, but these themes were not as prominent during interviews. These were knowing what to expect, being physically able, having confidence in and being positive towards health services, imagining the benefits given previous positive experiences, determination to maintain or regain independence, and being 'crippled' by the fear of falling. These themes mapped on to nine TDF domains: 'knowledge', 'skills', 'social role and identity', 'optimism', 'beliefs about consequences', 'goals', 'environmental context and resources', 'social influences' and 'emotion'. There were five TDF domains that were not relevant to the reasons for attending.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide theoretically based factors that influence attendance which can be used to inform the development of interventions to improve attendance to falls prevention programmes.

Identifying Barriers and Enablers to Attending Diabetic Retinopathy Screening in Immigrants to Canada From Ethnocultural Minority Groups: Protocol for a Qualitative Descriptive Study

Background

Immigrants to Canada belonging to ethnocultural minority groups are at increased risk of developing diabetes and complications, including diabetic retinopathy, and they are also less likely to be screened and treated. Improved attendance to retinopathy screening (eye tests) has the potential to reduce permanent complications, including blindness.

Objective

This study aims to identify the barriers and enablers of attending diabetic retinopathy screening among ethnocultural minority immigrants living with diabetes in Quebec and Ontario, Canada, to inform the development of a behavior change intervention to improve diabetic retinopathy screening attendance.

Methods

The research question draws on the needs of patients and clinicians. Using an integrated knowledge translation approach, the research team includes clinicians, researchers, and patient partners who will contribute throughout the study to developing and reviewing materials and procedures, helping to recruit participants, and disseminating findings. Using a convenience snowball strategy, we will recruit participants from three target groups: South Asian and Chinese people, and French-speaking people of African descent. To better facilitate reaching these groups and support participant recruitment, we will partner with community organizations and clinics serving our target populations in Ontario and Quebec. Data will be collected using semistructured interviews, using topic guides developed in English and translated into French, Mandarin, Hindi, and Urdu, and conducted in those languages. Data collection and analysis will be structured according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which synthesizes predominant theories of behavior change into 14 domains covering key modifiable factors that may operate as barriers or enablers to attending eye screening. We will use directed content analysis to code barriers and enablers to TDF domains, then thematic analysis to define key themes within domains.

Results

This study was approved for funding in December 2017, and the research ethics board approved the conduct of the study as of January 13, 2018. Data collection then began in April 2018. As of August 28, 2018, we have recruited 22 participants, and analysis is ongoing, with results expected to be published in 2020.

Conclusions

Findings from this study will inform the codevelopment of theory-informed, culturally- and linguistically-tailored interventions to support patients in attending retinopathy screening.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/15109

A qualitative study on barriers and enablers to uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening by people with diabetes in the Western Province of Sri Lanka

Background

Blindness and visual impairment from diabetic retinopathy (DR) are avoidable through early detection and timely treatment. The Western Province of Sri Lanka has the highest prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) (18.6%) in the country. A situational analysis identified a significant gap in DR screening services (DRSS) uptake in this region. Barriers that hinder people with DM (PwDM) from attending DRSS are poorly understood. The purpose of this study is to understand the factors which influence the uptake of DRSS and follow-up to inform health promotion strategies and improve the uptake of these services.

Methods

Eleven focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with PwDM who presented to medical, general eye and vitreoretinal services in three public sector institutions (two tertiary and one secondary level) in the Western Province between October 2016 and March 2017. We enrolled six groups (four Sinhala speaking, two Tamil) of women and five groups (three Sinhala and two Tamil) of men representing ethnicity and gender. We performed a thematic analysis and described the main themes and subthemes using the socio-ecological model as a framework.

Results

We identified lack of knowledge of both the condition and the need for screening as key barriers to access DRSS. Socio-cultural factors in the family environment, economic reasons and institutional factors were also important barriers. Additional reasons include long waiting time at eye clinics and poor referrals exacerbated by the lack of a systematic DRSS. In addition, attitudes to DRSS such as fear of discomfort from the procedure and the need for accompaniment following mydriasis were also deterrents to follow-up screening.

Conclusion

This study has shown that there are inter-related user, family, and institutional factors which affect the uptake of DRSS. Understanding how DR is conceptualised by PwDM in this region is essential to refine strategies to improve access to DRSS. Strategies to improve knowledge need to be more culturally acceptable and relevant to PwDM and their families, with increased availability of DRSS at convenient locations may increase timely uptake of screening.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41182-019-0160-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Systematic review on barriers and enablers for access to diabetic retinopathy screening services in different income settings

BACKGROUND

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) can lead to visual impairment and blindness if not detected and treated in time. Knowing the barriers/enablers in advance in contrasting different country income settings may accelerate development of a successful DR screening (DRS) program. This would be especially applicable in the low-income settings with the rising prevalence of DR.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review is to identify and contrast the barriers/enablers to DRS for different contexts using both consumers i.e., people with diabetes (PwDM) and provider perspectives and system level factors in different country income settings.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library from the databases start date to December 2018. We included the studies reported on barriers and enablers to access DRS services based at health care facilities. We categorised and synthesized themes related to the consumers (individuals), providers and the health systems (environment) as main dimensions according to the constructs of social cognitive theory, supported by the quantitative measures i.e., odds ratios as reported by each of the study authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 77 studies primarily describing the barriers and enablers. Most of the studies were from high income settings (72.7%, 56/77) and cross sectional in design (76.6%, 59/77). From the perspectives of consumers, lack of knowledge, attitude, awareness and motivation were identified as major barriers. The enablers were fear of blindness, proximity of screening facility, experiences of vision loss and being concerned of eye complications. In providers' perspectives, lack of skilled human resources, training programs, infrastructure of retinal imaging and cost of services were the main barriers. Higher odds of uptake of DRS services was observed when PwDM were provided health education (odds ratio (OR) 4.3) and having knowledge on DR (OR range 1.3-19.7).

CONCLUSION

Knowing the barriers to access DRS is a pre-requisite in development of a successful screening program. The awareness, knowledge and attitude of the consumers, availability of skilled human resources and infrastructure emerged as the major barriers to access to DRS in any income setting.

What works to increase attendance for diabetic retinopathy screening? An evidence synthesis and economic analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) is effective but uptake is suboptimal.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of quality improvement (QI) interventions for DRS attendance; describe the interventions in terms of QI components and behaviour change techniques (BCTs); identify theoretical determinants of attendance; investigate coherence between BCTs identified in interventions and determinants of attendance; and determine the cost-effectiveness of QI components and BCTs for improving DRS.

DATA SOURCES AND REVIEW METHODS

Phase 1 - systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions to increase DRS attendance (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and trials registers to February 2017) and coding intervention content to classify QI components and BCTs. Phase 2 - review of studies reporting factors influencing attendance, coded to theoretical domains (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and sources of grey literature to March 2016). Phase 3 - mapping BCTs (phase 1) to theoretical domains (phase 2) and an economic evaluation to determine the cost-effectiveness of BCTs or QI components.

RESULTS

Phase 1 - 7277 studies were screened, of which 66 RCTs were included in the review. Interventions were multifaceted and targeted patients, health-care professionals (HCPs) or health-care systems. Overall, interventions increased DRS attendance by 12% [risk difference (RD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.14] compared with usual care, with substantial heterogeneity in effect size. Both DRS-targeted and general QI interventions were effective, particularly when baseline attendance levels were low. All commonly used QI components and BCTs were associated with significant improvements, particularly in those with poor attendance. Higher effect estimates were observed in subgroup analyses for the BCTs of 'goal setting (outcome, i.e. consequences)' (RD 0.26, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.36) and 'feedback on outcomes (consequences) of behaviour' (RD 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.29) in interventions targeting patients and of 'restructuring the social environment' (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26) and 'credible source' (RD 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24) in interventions targeting HCPs. Phase 2 - 3457 studies were screened, of which 65 non-randomised studies were included in the review. The following theoretical domains were likely to influence attendance: 'environmental context and resources', 'social influences', 'knowledge', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'beliefs about consequences' and 'emotions'. Phase 3 - mapping identified that interventions included BCTs targeting important barriers to/enablers of DRS attendance. However, BCTs targeting emotional factors around DRS were under-represented. QI components were unlikely to be cost-effective whereas BCTs with a high probability (≥ 0.975) of being cost-effective at a societal willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY included 'goal-setting (outcome)', 'feedback on outcomes of behaviour', 'social support' and 'information about health consequences'. Cost-effectiveness increased when DRS attendance was lower and with longer screening intervals.

LIMITATIONS

Quality improvement/BCT coding was dependent on descriptions of intervention content in primary sources; methods for the identification of coherence of BCTs require improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomised controlled trial evidence indicates that QI interventions incorporating specific BCT components are associated with meaningful improvements in DRS attendance compared with usual care. Interventions generally used appropriate BCTs that target important barriers to screening attendance, with a high probability of being cost-effective. Research is needed to optimise BCTs or BCT combinations that seek to improve DRS attendance at an acceptable cost. BCTs targeting emotional factors represent a missed opportunity to improve attendance and should be tested in future studies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016044157 and PROSPERO CRD42016032990.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Identification of barriers, facilitators and system-based implementation strategies to increase teleophthalmology use for diabetic eye screening in a rural US primary care clinic: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Teleophthalmology for diabetic eye screening is an evidence-based intervention substantially underused in US multipayer primary care clinics, even when equipment and trained personnel are readily available. We sought to identify patient and primary care provider (PCP) barriers, facilitators, as well as strategies to increase teleophthalmology use.

DESIGN

We conducted standardised open-ended, individual interviews and analysed the transcripts using both inductive and directed content analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to teleophthalmology use. The Chronic Care Model was used as a framework for the development of the interview guide and for categorising implementation strategies to increase teleophthalmology use.

SETTING

A rural, US multipayer primary care clinic with an established teleophthalmology programme for diabetic eye screening.

PARTICIPANTS

We conducted interviews with 29 participants (20 patients with diabetes and 9 PCPs).

RESULTS

Major patient barriers to teleophthalmology use included being unfamiliar with teleophthalmology, misconceptions about diabetic eye screening and logistical challenges. Major patient facilitators included a recommendation from the patient's PCP and factors related to convenience. Major PCP barriers to referring patients for teleophthalmology included difficulty identifying when patients are due for diabetic eye screening and being unfamiliar with teleophthalmology. Major PCP facilitators included the ease of the referral process and the communication of screening results. Based on our results, we developed a model that maps where these key patient and PCP barriers occur in the teleophthalmology referral process. Patients and PCPs also identified implementation strategies to directly address barriers and facilitators to teleophthalmology use.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and PCPs have limited familiarity with teleophthalmology for diabetic eye screening. PCPs were expected to initiate teleophthalmology referrals, but reported significant difficulty identifying when patients are due for diabetic eye screening. System-based implementation strategies primarily targeting PCP barriers in conjunction with improved patient and provider education may increase teleophthalmology use in rural, US multipayer primary care clinics.

Barriers to and enablers of diabetic retinopathy screening attendance: a systematic review of published and grey literature

AIMS

To identify and synthesize studies reporting modifiable barriers/enablers associated with retinopathy screening attendance in people with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, and to identify those most likely to influence attendance.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and the 'grey literature' for quantitative and qualitative studies to February 2017. Data (i.e. participant quotations, interpretive summaries, survey results) reporting barriers/enablers were extracted and deductively coded into domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework; with domains representing categories of theoretical barriers/enablers proposed to mediate behaviour change. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted within domains to describe the role each domain plays in facilitating or hindering screening attendance. Domains that were more frequently coded and for which more themes were generated were judged more likely to influence attendance.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine primary studies were included. We identified six theoretical domains ['environmental context and resources' (75% of included studies), 'social influences' (51%), 'knowledge' (51%), 'memory, attention, decision processes' (50%), 'beliefs about consequences' (38%) and 'emotions' (33%)] as the key mediators of diabetic retinopathy screening attendance. Examples of barriers populating these domains included inaccurate diabetic registers and confusion between routine eye care and retinopathy screening. Recommendations by healthcare professionals and community-level media coverage acted as enablers.

CONCLUSIONS

Across a variety of contexts, we found common barriers to and enablers of retinopathy screening that could be targeted in interventions aiming to increase screening attendance.

Clinical and Psychosocial Factors Influencing Retinal Screening Uptake Among Young Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Young adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D, 18-39 years) experience early-onset and rapid progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR), the leading cause of vision loss for working age adults. Despite this, uptake of retinal screening, the crucial first step in preventing vision loss from DR, is low. The aim of this review is to summarize the clinical and psychosocial factors affecting uptake of retinal screening.

RECENT FINDINGS

Barriers include lack of diabetes-related symptoms, low personal DR risk perception, high rates of depression and diabetes-related distress, fatalism about inevitability of complications, time and financial constraints, disengagement with existing diabetes self-management services, and perceived stigma due to having a condition associated with older adults. Young adults with T2D are an under-researched population who face an accumulation of barriers to retinal screening. Tailored interventions that address the needs, characteristics, and priorities of young adults with T2D are warranted.

Awareness of diabetic retinopathy and its association with attendance for systematic screening at the public primary care setting: a cross-sectional study in Hong Kong

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between awareness of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and actual attendance for DR screening.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Two public general outpatient clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

The subjects were people with diabetes mellitus (DM) who participated in a randomised controlled trial, set up in 2008, to test the impact of a copayment on attendance for DR screening.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The subjects' awareness of DR was evaluated using a structured questionnaire conducted via a telephone interview. The attendance for screening was from the actual attendance data. Association between awareness and attendance for screening was determined using multivariate logistic regression model and was reported as ORs.

RESULTS

A total of 2593 participants completed the questionnaire. A total of 42.9% (1113/2593) said they would worry if they had any vision loss and 79.6% (2063/2593) knew that DM could cause blindness. Only 17.5% (453/2593) knew that treatment was available for DR and 11.5% (297/2593) knew that early DR could be asymptomatic. The importance of having a regular eye examination was acknowledged by 75.7% (1964/2593), but 34% (881/2593) did not know how frequently their eyes should be examined. Worry about vision loss (OR=1.72, P<0.001), awareness of the importance of regular eye examination (OR=1.83, P=0.002) and awareness of the frequency of eye examinations ('every year' (OR=2.64, P<0.001) or 'every 6 months' (OR=3.27, P<0.001)) were the most significant factors associated with attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

Deficits in knowledge of DR and screening were found among subjects with DM, and three awareness factors were associated with attendance for screening. These factors could be targeted for future interventions.

Effect of the pharmacist-managed cardiovascular risk reduction services on diabetic retinopathy outcome measures

Background:

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a progressive, sight-threatening long-term complication of diabetes. Diabetes disease management reduces the risk of developing or progression to a severe form of DR. However, there are no reports of the potential role of pharmacists in DR progression.

Objective:

For this study, we performed a retrospective data analysis of patients with diabetes seen at cardiovascular risk reduction services provided by pharmacists with an objective to determine the potential role of pharmacists in the DR progression. These services involve pharmacists working in collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM), using a collaborative practice agreement (CPA) with primary care physicians.

Methods:

Patient records and ophthalmological notes were collected for 317 individuals seen by the pharmacists (intervention group) and 320 individuals seen only by a physician (control).

Results:

Statistical analysis was performed on 148 individuals in an intervention group and 120 individuals in the control group for which complete records were available. Retinopathy progression remained stable in 89.6 % of individuals in the intervention group compared to 87.9% in the control group. Moreover, the relative risk of retinopathy progressing to a severe form was 1.17 for the control group compared the intervention group.

Conclusions:

Our studies provide a proof-of-concept that pharmacists-managed care possesses a potential role in protection from DR, and paves a way for future pharmacists managed care with an emphasis on reducing diabetic complications.

Diabetic Retinopathy Screening: A Systematic Review on Patients' Non-Attendance

Diabetic Retinopathy is a microvascular complication of diabetes, that can go undetected and unnoticed until irreversible damage and even blindness has occurred. Effective screening for diabetic retinopathy has been proven to reduce the risk of sight loss. The National Health Service (NHS) which provides healthcare for all UK citizens, implemented systematic retinal screening for diabetic retinopathy in England in 2003, with the aim of identifying and treating all patients with sight threatening retinopathy. Crucial to this is patients partaking in the programme. Therefore, increasing screening uptake has been a major focus of the programme. This review explores the views of people living with diabetes who do not attend retinal screening, their characteristics, concerns, experiences of retinal screening and their understanding of the risks of diabetic retinopathy. All studies that satisfied the study inclusion criteria on 'patients' non-attendance at retinal screening', between 2003 to 2017 were included after extensive database search. A total of 16 studies were included in the review. Findings showed that socio-economic deprivation was a major risk factor for non-attendance, about 11.5-13.4% of the screened population had sight threatening retinopathy (STDR), repeated nonattendance was linked to sight threatening diabetic retinopathy, and that certain factors, could be barriers or incentives for screening uptake. Some of those factors are modifiable whilst others are not.

Individualised variable-interval risk-based screening for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy: the Liverpool Risk Calculation Engine

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Individualised variable-interval risk-based screening offers better targeting and improved cost-effectiveness in screening for diabetic retinopathy. We developed a generalisable risk calculation engine (RCE) to assign personalised intervals linked to local population characteristics, and explored differences in assignment compared with current practice.

METHODS

Data from 5 years of photographic screening and primary care for people with diabetes, screen negative at the first of > 1 episode, were combined in a purpose-built near-real-time warehouse. Covariates were selected from a dataset created using mixed qualitative/quantitative methods. Markov modelling predicted progression to screen-positive (referable diabetic retinopathy) against the local cohort history. Retinopathy grade informed baseline risk and multiple imputation dealt with missing data. Acceptable intervals (6, 12, 24 months) and risk threshold (2.5%) were established with patients and professional end users.

RESULTS

Data were from 11,806 people with diabetes (46,525 episodes, 388 screen-positive). Covariates with sufficient predictive value were: duration of known disease, HbA1c, age, systolic BP and total cholesterol. Corrected AUC (95% CIs) were: 6 months 0.88 (0.83, 0.93), 12 months 0.90 (0.87, 0.93) and 24 months 0.91 (0.87, 0.94). Sensitivities/specificities for a 2.5% risk were: 6 months 0.61, 0.93, 12 months 0.67, 0.90 and 24 months 0.82, 0.81. Implementing individualised RCE-based intervals would reduce the proportion of people becoming screen-positive before the allocated screening date by > 50% and the number of episodes by 30%.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

The Liverpool RCE shows sufficient performance for a local introduction into practice before wider implementation, subject to external validation. This approach offers potential enhancements of screening in improved local applicability, targeting and cost-effectiveness.

Diabetic Eye Screening: Knowledge and Perspectives from Providers and Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetic retinopathy remains the leading cause of blindness among working-age US adults even though timely screening and treatment prevent 90% of blindness. We summarize current knowledge and perspectives to better understand why diabetic eye screening rates remain low and future directions towards preventing blindness from diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Significant advancements in the past 10 years include primary care and patient-oriented interventions as well as the use of teleophthalmology. In England, diabetic eye disease is no longer the leading cause of certifiable blindness following the implementation of a national teleophthalmology program for diabetic retinopathy. Multiple workflow and systems-level barriers affect providers. Patient barriers include a limited understanding of screening and lack of access to care. Interventions have been developed, but new barriers exist towards sustaining their impact. More research is needed to identify and implement the best practices to increase diabetic eye screening rates long-term.

Factors determining uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening in Oxfordshire

AIMS

To investigate variables at the demographic and primary care practice levels that influence the uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the management software of one screening programme for 21 797 people registered with 79 general practices. Uptake was examined by gender, age group, modality of screening (mobile unit at general practice versus high-street optometrist), and by general practice. A telephone survey of high-street optometrists provided information on the availability of screening appointments.

RESULTS

Uptake was 82.4% during the study period, and was higher for men (83.2%) than for women (81.5%) (P = 0.001). Uptake varied by age group (P < 0.001), being lowest in those aged 12-39 years (67%). Uptake was higher for people invited to a general practice for screening by a mobile unit (83.5%) than for those invited for screening by a high-street optometrist (82%) (P = 0.006). After adjusting for these factors and for socio-economic deprivation score at the location of the general practice, heterogeneity in uptake rate was still observed between some practices. Our survey of optometrists indicated wide variation in the availability of time slots for screening during the week and of screening appointment provision.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetic retinopathy screening services do not achieve high uptake among the youngest or oldest age groups. Practices in the least deprived areas had the highest uptake. Variation in uptake between general practices after adjustment for individual-level variables and deprivation suggests that practice-level factors may have an important role in determining rates of screening attendance.

What factors influence uptake of retinal screening among young adults with type 2 diabetes? A qualitative study informed by the theoretical domains framework

AIMS

Young adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D, 18-39years) face increased risk of vision loss from diabetic retinopathy (DR). Retinal screening is essential to detect DR, yet screening rates for this group are low and little is known about the underlying factors influencing this important behavior. Using the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to guide data collection and analysis, we explored screening barriers and facilitator, contrasting them with a comparator group of older adults with T2D (40+ years).

METHODS

Thirty semi-structured telephone interviews (10 younger, 20 older adults) were conducted. Data were coded into TDF domains with salience identified by "frequency" of reference. Screening facilitators and barriers were systematically compared between groups.

RESULTS

Although many screening facilitators and barriers were shared by younger and older adults, additional factors highly relevant to the former included: social comparison with others ('social influences'); concern for the impact on the family unit, unrealistic optimism and perceived invulnerability ('beliefs about consequences'); lack of time and financial resources ('environmental context and resources'), and DR misconceptions ('knowledge').

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that young adult retinal screening behavior was influenced by additional social cognitive factors compared to older adults, providing a first-step evidence base for clinicians and other health professionals, and potential targets for future eye health and retinal screening interventions.

Population trends in the 10-year incidence and prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in the UK: a cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 2004-2014

OBJECTIVES

To describe trends in the incidence and prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the UK by diabetes type, age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, region and calendar year.

DESIGN

Cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).

SETTING

UK primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

7.7 million patients ≥12 contributing to the CPRD from 2004 to 2014.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Age-standardised prevalence and incidence of diabetes, DR and severe DR (requiring photocoagulation) by calendar year and population subgroup. Relative risk of developing DR and severe DR by population subgroup.

RESULTS

The prevalence of DR was 48.4% in the population type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) (14 846/30 657) and 28.3% (95 807/338 390) in the population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Prevalence of DR remained stable in people with T2DM and decreased in people with T1DM. Screening for DR increased over time for patients with T2DM and remained static for patients with T1DM Incidence of DR increased in parallel with the incidence of T2DM in both diabetic populations. Among patients with T2DM, relative risk of DR varied significantly by region, was increased for older age groups and in men compared with women, with risk of severe DR increased in South Asian groups and more deprived groups. Relative risk of DR for patients with T1DM varied by age and region, but not by gender, ethnic group or deprivation.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study to date examining the burden of DR in the UK. Regional disparities in incidence may relate to differences in screening delivery and disease ascertainment. Evidence that deprivation and ethnicity are associated with a higher risk of severe DR highlights a significant potential health inequality. Findings from this study will have implications for professionals working in the diabetes and sight loss sectors, particularly to inform approaches for diagnosis of retinopathy and campaigning to better tackle the disease for at risk groups.

Divergent Perceptions of Barriers to Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Among Patients and Care Providers, Los Angeles, California, 2014-2015

Introduction

Despite availability of screening for diabetic retinopathy, testing is underused by many low-income and racial/ethnic minority patients with diabetes. We examined perceived barriers to diabetic retinopathy screening among low-income patients and their health care providers and provider staffers.

Methods

We collected survey data from 101 patients with diabetes and 44 providers and staffers at a safety-net clinic where annual diabetic retinopathy screening rates were low. Barriers specified in the survey were derived from the literature.

Results

Patients surveyed (mean [standard deviation] age, 54.0 [7.7] y; 41% were male) were primarily Hispanics (70%) and African Americans (27%) of low socioeconomic status. Overall, 55% of patients received diabetic retinopathy screening in the previous year. Patients who could not explain why this screening is needed reported more barriers than patients who could (2.5 vs 1.4 barriers, P = .02). Fewer patients reported that they experienced barriers such as transportation (15%), language issues (15%), cultural beliefs or myths (4%), denial (8%), and fear (5%), which providers and staffers considered very or extremely important (all P < .001). Financial burdens (26%) and depression (22%) were most commonly reported by patients as barriers, yet providers and staffers did not rate these barriers as important, P < .001.

Conclusion

Patients and health care providers had markedly divergent perceptions of barriers to diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients with poor understanding of the need for screening were more likely to report such barriers. These results suggest a need for active community engagement to find key elements for education programs and other interventions to increase rates of diabetic retinopathy screening, particularly among low-income, minority populations.

Screening attendance, age group and diabetic retinopathy level at first screen

AIMS

To report on the relationships between age at diagnosis of diabetes, time from registration with the screening programme to first diabetic eye screening and severity of diabetic retinopathy.

METHODS

Data were extracted from four English screening programmes and from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish programmes. Time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening and age at diagnosis were calculated.

RESULTS

Time from registration with the screening programme to first screening episode is strongly related to age at registration. Within 18 months of registration 89% of 3958 young people under 18 years of age and 81% of 391 293 people over 35 years of age were seen. In 19 058 people between 18 and 34 years of age, 80% coverage was not reached until 2 years and 9 months. The time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening is positively associated with severity of disease (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This report is the first that to demonstrate that those in the 18-34 year age group are least likely to attend promptly for screening after registration with a higher risk of referable diabetic retinopathy being present at the time of first screen. Date of diagnosis should be recorded and prodigious efforts made to screen all people promptly after diagnosis. Screening programmes should collect data on those who have not attended within one year of registration.

System-level and patient-level explanations for non-attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening in Sutton and Merton (London, UK): a qualitative analysis of a service evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Non-attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening has financial implications for screening programmes and potential clinical costs to patients. We sought to identify explanations for why patients had never attended a screening appointment (never attendance) in one programme.

DESIGN

Qualitative analysis of a service evaluation.

SETTING

One South London (UK) diabetic eye screening programme.

PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE

Patients who had been registered with one screening programme for at least 18 months and who had never attended screening within the programme were contacted by telephone to ascertain why this was the case. Patients' general practices were also contacted for information about why each patient may not have attended. Framework analysis was used to interpret responses.

RESULTS

Of the 296 patients, 38 were not eligible for screening and of the 258 eligible patients, 159 were not contactable (31 of these had phone numbers that were not in use). We obtained reasons from patients/general practices/clinical notes for non-attendance for 146 (57%) patients. A number of patient-level and system-level factors were given to explain non-attendance. Patient-level factors included having other commitments, being anxious about screening, not engaging with any diabetes care and being misinformed about screening. System-level factors included miscommunication about where the patient lives, their clinical situation and practical problems that could have been overcome had their existence been shared between programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

This service evaluation provides unique insight into the patient-level and system-level reasons for never attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening. Improved sharing of relevant information between providers has the potential to facilitate increased uptake of screening. Greater awareness of patient-level barriers may help providers offer a more accessible service.

Attitudes, access and anguish: a qualitative interview study of staff and patients' experiences of diabetic retinopathy screening

OBJECTIVE

To examine the experiences of patients, health professionals and screeners; their interactions with and understandings of diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS); and how these influence uptake.

DESIGN

Purposive, qualitative design using multiperspectival, semistructured interviews and thematic analysis.

SETTING

Three UK Screening Programme regions with different service-delivery modes, minority ethnic and deprivation levels across rural, urban and inner-city areas, in general practitioner practices and patients' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

62 including 38 patients (22 regular-screening attenders, 16 non-regular attenders) and 24 professionals (15 primary care professionals and 9 screeners).

RESULTS

Antecedents to attendance included knowledge about diabetic retinopathy and screening; antecedents to non-attendance included psychological, pragmatic and social factors. Confusion between photographs taken at routine eye tests and DRS photographs was identified. The differing regional invitation methods and screening locations were discussed, with convenience and transport safety being over-riding considerations for patients. Some patients mentioned significant pain and visual disturbance from mydriasis drops as a deterrent to attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

In this, the first study to consider multiperspectival experiential accounts, we identified that proactive coordination of care involving patients, primary care and screening programmes, prior to, during and after screening is required. Multiple factors, prior to, during and after screening, are involved in the attendance and non-attendance for DRS. Further research is needed to establish whether patient self-management educational interventions and the pharmacological reformulation of shorter acting mydriasis drops, may improve uptake of DRS. This might, in turn, reduce preventable vision loss and its associated costs to individuals and their families, and to health and social care providers, reducing current inequalities.