IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002945.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of personalised risk-based screening schedules to optimise workload and sojourn time in screening programmes for diabetic retinopathy: A retrospective cohort study

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Ochs
  • Stuart McGurnaghan
  • Mike W Black
  • Graham P Leese
  • Sam Philip
  • Naveed Sattar
  • Caroline Styles
  • Sarah H Wild
  • Paul M McKeigue
  • Helen M Colhoun
  • on behalf of the Scottish Diabetes Research Network Epidemiology Group and the Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Collaborative

Abstract

Background: National guidelines in most countries set screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy (DR) that are insufficiently informed by contemporary incidence rates. This has unspecified implications for interval disease risks (IDs) of referable DR, disparities in ID between groups or individuals, time spent in referable state before screening (sojourn time), and workload. We explored the effect of various screening schedules on these outcomes and developed an open-access interactive policy tool informed by contemporary DR incidence rates. Methods and findings: Scottish Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programme data from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2016 were linked to diabetes registry data. This yielded 128,606 screening examinations in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 1,384,360 examinations in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Among those with T1D, 47% of those without and 44% of those with referable DR were female, mean diabetes duration was 21 and 23 years, respectively, and mean age was 26 and 24 years, respectively. Among those with T2D, 44% of those without and 42% of those with referable DR were female, mean diabetes duration was 9 and 14 years, respectively, and mean age was 58 and 52 years, respectively. Individual probability of developing referable DR was estimated using a generalised linear model and was used to calculate the intervals needed to achieve various IDs across prior grade strata, or at the individual level, and the resultant workload and sojourn time. The current policy in Scotland—screening people with no or mild disease annually and moderate disease every 6 months—yielded large differences in ID by prior grade (13.2%, 3.6%, and 0.6% annually for moderate, mild, and no prior DR strata, respectively, in T1D) and diabetes type (2.4% in T1D and 0.6% in T2D overall). Maintaining these overall risks but equalising risk across prior grade strata would require extremely short intervals in those with moderate DR (1–2 months) and very long intervals in those with no prior DR (35–47 months), with little change in workload or average sojourn time. Changing to intervals of 12, 9, and 3 months in T1D and to 24, 9, and 3 months in T2D for no, mild, and moderate DR strata, respectively, would substantially reduce disparity in ID across strata and between diabetes types whilst reducing workload by 26% and increasing sojourn time by 2.3 months. Including clinical risk factor data gave a small but significant increment in prediction of referable DR beyond grade (increase in C-statistic of 0.013 in T1D and 0.016 in T2D, both p

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Ochs & Stuart McGurnaghan & Mike W Black & Graham P Leese & Sam Philip & Naveed Sattar & Caroline Styles & Sarah H Wild & Paul M McKeigue & Helen M Colhoun & on behalf of the Scottish Diabetes, 2019. "Use of personalised risk-based screening schedules to optimise workload and sojourn time in screening programmes for diabetic retinopathy: A retrospective cohort study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002945
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002945
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002945&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002945?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002945. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.