| Literature DB >> 27435362 |
Christina Mtuya1, Charles R Cleland2, Heiko Philippin3,4, Kidayi Paulo1, Bernard Njau1, William U Makupa3, Claudette Hall5, Anthony Hall6, Paul Courtright7, Declare Mushi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an emerging public health problem in sub-Saharan Africa. Diabetic retinopathy is the commonest microvascular complication of diabetes and is a leading cause of blindness, mainly in adults of working age. Follow-up is crucial to the effective management of diabetic retinopathy, however, follow-up rates are often poor in sub-Saharan Africa. The aim of this study was to assess the proportion of patients not presenting for follow-up and the reasons for poor follow-up of diabetic patients after screening for retinopathy in Kilimanjaro Region of Tanzania.Entities:
Keywords: Africa; Diabetic retinopathy; Follow-up; Screening
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27435362 PMCID: PMC4950081 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-016-0288-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.209
Characteristics of study participants split by attendance at the recommended follow-up appointment, n (%)
| Attendance at follow-up appointment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes ( | No ( | Odds ratio (95 % CI) | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 26 (29.9) | 61 (70.1) | 1.0 (reference) |
| Female | 24 (20.7) | 92 (79.3) | 0.61 (0.32 – 1.16) |
| * | |||
| Age | |||
| ≤50 | 11 (34.4) | 21 (65.6) | |
| 51–60 | 18 (26.1) | 51 (73.9) | |
| 61–-70 | 9 (17) | 44 (83) | |
| 71–80 | 8 (23.5) | 26 (76.5) | |
| >80 | 4 (26.7) | 11 (73.3) | |
| Mean Age | 60.9 | 62.9 | |
| ** | |||
| Monthly Income | |||
| <30 000 TSH | 20 (19.4) | 83 (80.6) | |
| 30 000 – 50 000 TSH | 13 (26) | 37 (74) | |
| 50 000 – 70 000 TSH | 5 (27.8) | 13 (72.2) | |
| >70 000 TSH | 12 (37.5) | 20 (62.5) | |
| ** | |||
| Education | |||
| No formal education | 3 (15) | 17 (85) | 0.57 (0.13 – 2.57) |
| Primary | 29 (25.4) | 85 (74.6) | 1.12 (0.43 – 2.88) |
| Incomplete primary | 11 (28.2) | 28 (71.8) | 1.29 (0.43 – 3.84) |
| Secondary or higher | 7 (23.3) | 23 (76.7) | 1.0 (reference) |
| * | |||
| Referral process clear | |||
| Yes | 43 (33.6) | 85 (66.4) | 4.2 (1.85 – 9.54) |
| No | 7 (9.3) | 68 (90.7) | 1.0 (reference) |
| * | |||
| Were you told diabetic retinopathy can be treated | |||
| Yes | 33 (37.1) | 56 (62.9) | 3.36 (1.72 – 6.58) |
| No | 17 (14.9) | 97 (85.1) | 1.0 (reference) |
| * | |||
| Mean time taken to travel from patients village to KCMC (minutes) | 60 | 84 | |
| * | |||
| Mean cost of travel from patients village to KCMC (Tanzanian Shillings) | 2426 | 3342 | |
| * | |||
* p values calculated using t test for means and chi squared for proportions
** p values calculated using chi squared for trend test
KCMC Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, TSH Tanzanian Shilling
Logistic regression analysis for factors associated with compliance with follow-up recommendations
| Attendance at follow up appointment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
| Potential risk factors | OR (95 % CI) |
| OR (95 % CI) |
|
| Older age | 0.98 (0.96 – 1.01) | 0.302 | 0.99 (0.96 – 1.03) | 0.74 |
| Female sex | 0.61 (0.32 – 1.16) | 0.134 | 0.65 (0.32 – 1.32) | 0.24 |
| More education | 1.09 (0.73 – 1.61) | 0.68 | Not included | |
| Higher income | 1.34 (1.02 – 1.77) | 0.038 | Not included | |
| Referral process clear | 4.2 (1.85 – 9.54) | 0.001 | 2.93 (1.24 – 6.92) | 0.014 |
| Told by healthcare worker that DR can be treated | 3.36 (1.72 – 6.58) | <0.001 | 2.80 (1.38 – 5.71) | 0.005 |
| Time taken to travel from village to KCMC | 0.99 (0.99–0.99) | 0.018 | 0.99 (0.99 – 1.00) | 0.08 |
| Cost of travel from village to KCMC | 0.99 (0.99–0.99) | 0.025 | Not included | |
A backward stepwise selection process was performed to decide which factors to include in the multivariate model. A p value of <0.2 was the criterion for entry into the multivariate model
DR diabetic retinopathy, KCMC Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre
A p value of <0.05 was used to indicate significance