Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

{{metadata.Title}}

{{metadata.Headline}}

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

J Olson 1,*, P Sharp 2, K Goatman 2, G Prescott 3, G Scotland 3, A Fleming 2, S Philip 4, C Santiago 5, S Borooah 6, D Broadbent 7, V Chong 8, P Dodson 9, S Harding 10, G Leese 11, C Styles 12, K Swa 13, H Wharton 14

1 Grampian Retinal Screening Programme, Aberdeen, UK
2 College of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
3 School of Medicine and Dentistry, Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
4 Grampian Diabetes Research Unit Diabetes Centre, Woolmanhill Hospital, Aberdeen, UK
5 Eye Out-patient Department, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
6 Princess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, Edinburgh, UK
7 Liverpool Diabetes Eye Centre and School of Clinical Sciences, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK
8 Oxford Eye Hospital, Oxford, UK
9 Heartlands Hospital and Aston University, Birmingham, UK
10 Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, Department of Eye and Vision Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
11 Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK
12 Department of Ophthalmology, Queen Margaret Hospital, Dunfermline, UK
13 National Services Division, National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, UK
14 Diabetes and Endocrinology Unit, Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham, UK
* Corresponding author Email: john.olson@nhs.net

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} {{metadata.Title}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

You might also be interested in:
{{classification.Category.Concept}}

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine the best photographic surrogate markers for detecting sight-threatening macular oedema (MO) in people with diabetes attending UK national screening programmes.

DESIGN

A multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of 3170 patients with photographic signs of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region [exudates within two disc diameters, microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages (M/DHs) and blot haemorrhages (BHs)] who were recruited from seven study centres.

SETTING

All patients were recruited and imaged at one of seven study centres in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Dundee, Dunfermline, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Oxford.

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects with features of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region attending one of seven diabetic retinal screening programmes.

INTERVENTIONS

Alternative referral criteria for suspected MO based on photographic surrogate markers; an optical coherence tomographic examination in addition to the standard digital retinal photograph.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) To determine the best method to detect sight-threatening MO in people with diabetes using photographic surrogate markers. (2) Sensitivity and specificity estimates to assess the costs and consequences of using alternative strategies. (3) Modelled long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

Prevalence of MO was strongly related to the presence of lesions and was roughly five times higher in subjects with exudates or BHs or more than two M/DHs within one disc diameter. Having worse visual acuity was associated with about a fivefold higher prevalence of MO. Current manual screening grading schemes that ignore visual acuity or the presence of M/DHs could be improved by taking these into account. Health service costs increase substantially with more sensitive/less specific strategies. A fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, is superior to all current manual grading schemes for detecting MO in people with diabetes. The addition of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to each strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with all current manual grading schemes, for the same sensitivity, a fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, achieves a higher specificity for detecting MO in people with diabetes, especially if visual acuity is included in the automated strategy. Overall, costs to the health service are likely to increase if more sensitive referral strategies are adopted over more specific screening strategies for MO, for only very small gains in QALYs. The addition of OCT to each screening strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study has been registered as REC/IRAS 07/S0801/107, UKCRN ID 9063 and NIHR HTA 06/402/49.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 17, No. 51. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine the best photographic surrogate markers for detecting sight-threatening macular oedema (MO) in people with diabetes attending UK national screening programmes.

DESIGN

A multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of 3170 patients with photographic signs of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region [exudates within two disc diameters, microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages (M/DHs) and blot haemorrhages (BHs)] who were recruited from seven study centres.

SETTING

All patients were recruited and imaged at one of seven study centres in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Dundee, Dunfermline, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Oxford.

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects with features of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region attending one of seven diabetic retinal screening programmes.

INTERVENTIONS

Alternative referral criteria for suspected MO based on photographic surrogate markers; an optical coherence tomographic examination in addition to the standard digital retinal photograph.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) To determine the best method to detect sight-threatening MO in people with diabetes using photographic surrogate markers. (2) Sensitivity and specificity estimates to assess the costs and consequences of using alternative strategies. (3) Modelled long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

Prevalence of MO was strongly related to the presence of lesions and was roughly five times higher in subjects with exudates or BHs or more than two M/DHs within one disc diameter. Having worse visual acuity was associated with about a fivefold higher prevalence of MO. Current manual screening grading schemes that ignore visual acuity or the presence of M/DHs could be improved by taking these into account. Health service costs increase substantially with more sensitive/less specific strategies. A fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, is superior to all current manual grading schemes for detecting MO in people with diabetes. The addition of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to each strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with all current manual grading schemes, for the same sensitivity, a fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, achieves a higher specificity for detecting MO in people with diabetes, especially if visual acuity is included in the automated strategy. Overall, costs to the health service are likely to increase if more sensitive referral strategies are adopted over more specific screening strategies for MO, for only very small gains in QALYs. The addition of OCT to each screening strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study has been registered as REC/IRAS 07/S0801/107, UKCRN ID 9063 and NIHR HTA 06/402/49.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 17, No. 51. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

 

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 2 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions