Abstract
The importance of screening for diabetic retinopathy has been established, but the best method for screening has not yet been determined. We report on a trial of assessment of digital photographs by telemedicine compared with standard retinal photographs of the same fields and clinical examination by ophthalmologists. A total of 129 diabetic inpatients were screened for diabetic retinopathy by slit-lamp biomicroscopy performed by an ophthalmologist and by two-field 50 degrees non-stereo digital fundus photographs assessed by six screening centers that received the images by electronic mail. Conventional 35-mm transparencies of the same fields as the digital photographs were assessed by a retinal specialist and served as the reference method for detection of diabetic retinopathy. Slit-lamp biomicroscopy was the reference method for the detection of macular edema. The prevalence of any form of diabetic retinopathy was 30% (n = 35); of sight-threatening retinopathy including macular edema, the prevalence was 6% (n = 7). The assessment of digital images by the six screening centers resulted in a median sensitivity of 85% and a median specificity of 90% for the detection of moderate nonproliferative or sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy. Clinically significant macular edema (n = 4) was correctly identified in 15 of the 24 grading reports. An additional seven reports referred the patients for further investigation because of concurrent diabetic retinopathy. Telescreening for diabetic retinopathy by an assessment of two-field 50 degrees non-stereo digital images is a valid screening method. Although detection of clinically significant macular edema using biomicroscopy is superior to digital or standard non-stereo photographs, only few patients with sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy are missed.
Highlights
The importance of screening for diabetic retinopathy has been established, but the best method for screening has not yet been determined
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS — A total of 129 diabetic inpatients were screened for diabetic retinopathy by slit-lamp biomicroscopy performed by an ophthalmologist and by two-field 50° non-stereo digital fundus photographs assessed by six screening centers that received the images by electronic mail
Conventional 35-mm transparencies of the same fields as the digital photographs were assessed by a retinal specialist and served as the reference method for detection of diabetic retinopathy
Summary
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS — A total of 129 diabetic inpatients were screened for diabetic retinopathy by slit-lamp biomicroscopy performed by an ophthalmologist and by two-field 50° non-stereo digital fundus photographs assessed by six screening centers that received the images by electronic mail. Detection of clinically significant macular edema using biomicroscopy is superior to digital or standard non-stereo photographs, only few patients with sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy are missed. In the study reported here, we adopted the Field Guide Book and compared a combination of slit-lamp biomicroscopy performed by an ophthalmologist and evaluation of two-field 35-mm transparencies with the assessment of two-field digital fundus images sent to distant screening centers in a telemedical setting. The screening threshold was defined as moderate nonproliferative or more severe diabetic retinopathy and/or clinically significant macular edema Patients with this degree of retinopathy would be referred for ophthalmologic examination. Since the sample size for estimating sensitivity was small, we calculated 95% confidence limits by the exact method
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
