-
Clinical Ophthalmology
-
About Dovepress
Open access peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals.
-
Open Access
Dove Medical Press is now a member of the Open Access Initiative
-
An Author's Guide
A guide to help authors get their paper published.
-
Advocacy
Support Open Access and Dove Press
-
Reprints
Promotional Article Monitoring - further details
-
Favored Author Program
Real benefits for authors, including fast-track processing of papers.
Prospective comparison of two methods of screening for diabetic retinopathy by nonmydriatic fundus camera
Original Research
(1535) Views (426) Full article downloads
Authors: Pedro Romero-Aroca, Ramon Sagarra-Alamo, Josep Basora-Gallisa, et al
Published Date December 2010
Volume 2010:4 Pages 1481 - 1488
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S14521
Pedro Romero-Aroca1, Ramon Sagarra-Alamo2, Josep Basora-Gallisa2, Teresa Basora-Gallisa2, Marc Baget-Bernaldiz2, Angel Bautista-Perez11Ophthalmology Service, Hospital Universitario Sant Joan, IISPV, Universidad Rovira I Virgili, 2Health Primary Care Region Reus-Priorat, Universidad Rovira I Virgili, Reus, Spain
Purpose: To compare the results obtained by two screening techniques for diabetic retinopathy.
Methods: Patients were assessed in two groups, according to whether the retinal images were analyzed by the general practitioner (Group 1) or by the ophthalmologist (Group 2) in a two-year prospective study using telemedicine.
Results: The number of patients referred to the nonmydriatic fundus camera unit was higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (63.80% versus 17.63%). Greater patient adherence was observed in Group 1 than in Group 2 when patients came to retinography (98.25% versus 87.52%). There were no significant differences in other technique variables. The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy was similar in both groups (8.98% in Group 1 and 9.16% in Group 2), but the prevalence of severe proliferative diabetic retinopathy was higher in Group 2 (1.69% [severe] and 0.45% [proliferative]) than in Group 1 (1.01% and 0.11%, respectively). Diabetic macular edema was more prevalent in Group 2 (2.03%).
Conclusions: The inclusion of general practitioners in the screening method seems to be important. A great number of patients with diabetes mellitus were screened, and a higher percentage of patients with diabetic retinopathy or macular edema were detected.
Keywords: nonmydriatic fundus camera, diabetic retinopathy, diabetes mellitus, diabetic macular edema, diabetic retinopathy, epidemiology
Readers of this article also read:
Exacerbation rate, health status and mortality in COPD – a review of potential interventions
Refinement of rigid-body protein–protein docking using backbone and side-chain minimization with a coarse-grained model
Correlation between morphology of optic disc determined by Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II and visual function in eyes with open-angle glaucoma
Retinal nerve fiber layer evaluation in multiple sclerosis with spectral domain optical coherence tomography
Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in recovered and persistent amblyopia
Detection of retinal changes in Parkinson's disease with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography
Erratum
Cumulative clinical experience from over a decade of use of levofloxacin in community-acquired pneumonia: critical appraisal and role in therapy
Evaluation of analgesic efficacy of bromfenac sodium ophthalmic solution 0.09% versus ketorolac tromethamine ophthalmic solution 0.5% following LASEK or Epi-LASIK
- Journal Indexing
See where all the Dove Press journals are indexed
- Interested in being a peer-reviewer?
Click here to register.
- Insight into 144 patients with ocular vascular events during VEGF antagonist injections
- Endophthalmitis: Pathogenesis, clinical presentation, management, and perspectives
- Protection of neurons in the retinal ganglion cell layer against excitotoxicity by the N-acylethanolamine, N-linoleoylethanolamine
- A computer-based anaglyphic system for the treatment of amblyopia




