PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H A Fogel

Publications and source records attributed to H A Fogel.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Screening for diabetic retinopathy.

PURPOSE: To determine the appropriate patients, methods, and timing for screening for diabetic retinopathy. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified through prominent review articles, the authors' files, recommendations from experts, and a MEDLINE search (1986 to the present); additional references were selected from the bibliographies of identified articles. STUDY SELECTION: Selection of articles on the natural history of retinopathy was limited to large clinical series and formal epidemiologic studies of defined populations. Selection of articles on the therapeutic effect of photocoagulation and of glycemic control was limited to randomized trials. Sources bearing on the accuracy of screening modalities were necessarily more varied. DATA EXTRACTION: For important variables, individual estimates from multiple studies are presented rather than a single meta-analytic summary estimate. RESULTS: Screening for retinopathy is justifiable if early detection leads to less vision loss at an acceptable cost. The evidence shows that 1) laser therapy reduces the rate of vision loss by 50% among patients with proliferative retinopathy and macular edema, conditions that are often asymptomatic; 2) duration of diabetes is the main risk factor for retinopathy; and 3) standard ophthalmoscopic examination has only moderate sensitivity (about 80% in research settings) and specificity (greater than 90% for proliferative retinopathy but lower for macular edema), making seven-field stereophotography a more accurate method. Estimates of cost effectiveness indicate that screening for retinopathy not only saves years of vision but may be cost saving from a societal perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for retinopathy in patients with diabetes, and subsequent photocoagulation therapy for those who have high risk macular edema or proliferative retinopathy, is clearly beneficial.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

Role of diabetologist in evaluating diabetic retinopathy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of diabetologists to screen diabetic patients for diabetic retinopathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Comparison of eye examination performed by diabetologists with direct ophthalmoscopy through an undilated pupil and by ophthalmologists through a dilated pupil with seven-field stereoscopic fundus photography (gold standard). The study consisted of 67 insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetic outpatients attending a diabetes clinic. RESULTS: On the basis of fundus photography, patients were classified as having no or insignificant (30%), minimal (31%), moderate (24%), or severe (15%) retinopathy. The diabetologists and ophthalmologists performed similarly in their ability to classify severity of diabetic retinopathy accurately. When no or insignificant retinopathy (isolated microaneurysms only) was detected by examination, clinically significant retinopathy detected by fundus photography was highly unlikely (less than 5%). On the other hand, if more than isolated microaneurysms were seen on examination, all examiners missed more severe lesions detected by fundus photography. Patients with corrected visual acuity worse than 20/30 had a high likelihood (100%) of moderate or severe retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Motivated well-trained diabetologists can screen for diabetic retinopathy. The absence of detectable lesions by direct ophthalmoscopy indicates that automatic referral to an ophthalmologist is not necessary. However, if any level of retinopathy is detected or corrected acuity is worse than 20/30, referral to an ophthalmologist is required. In this setting, fundus photography is advised because it is the most sensitive means of detecting clinically significant retinopathy. If other nonophthalmologists can be trained to achieve similar results, current recommendations for ophthalmologic referral that require annual ophthalmologic examinations for most diabetic patients may need to be reconsidered.

Adult↗