Literature DB >> 30770354

Philadelphia Telemedicine Glaucoma Detection and Follow-up Study: confirmation between eye screening and comprehensive eye examination diagnoses.

Lisa A Hark1,2, Jonathan S Myers3,4, Andrew Ines4, Alicia Jiang4, Kamran Rahmatnejad5, Tingting Zhan6, Benjamin E Leiby6, Sarah Hegarty6, Scott J Fudemberg3,4, Anand V Mantravadi3,4, Michael Waisbourd7, Jeffrey D Henderer8, Christine Burns5, Meskerem Divers5, Jeanne Molineaux5, Laura T Pizzi9, Ann P Murchison4,10, Jinan Saaddine11, Louis R Pasquale12, Julia A Haller4,13, L Jay Katz3,4.   

Abstract

AIMS: To evaluate agreement between ocular findings of a telemedicine eye screening (visit 1) with diagnoses of a comprehensive eye examination (visit 2).
METHODS: A primary care practice (PCP)-based telemedicine screening programme incorporating fundus photography, intraocular pressure (IOP) and clinical information was conducted. Eligible individuals were African American, Hispanic/Latino or Asian over the age of 40; Caucasian individuals over age 65; and adults of any ethnicity over age 40 with a family history of glaucoma or diabetes. Participants with abnormal images or elevated IOP were invited back for a complete eye examination. Both visit 1 and visit 2 were conducted at participants' local PCP. Ocular findings at visit 1 and eye examination diagnoses at visit 2 are presented, including a cost analysis.
RESULTS: Of 906 participants who attended visit 1, 536 were invited to visit 2 due to ocular findings or unreadable images. Among the 347 (64.9%) who attended visit 2, 280 (80.7%) were diagnosed with at least one ocular condition. Participants were predominately women (59.9%) and African American (65.6%), with a mean age (±SD) of 60.6±11.0 years. A high diagnostic confirmation rate (86.0%) was found between visit 1 and visit 2 for any ocular finding. Of 183 with suspicious nerves at visit 1, 143 (78.1%) were diagnosed as glaucoma or glaucoma suspects at visit 2.
CONCLUSIONS: This screening model may be adapted and scaled nationally and internationally. Referral to an ophthalmologist is warranted if abnormal or unreadable fundus images are detected or IOP is >21 mm Hg. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02390245. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diagnostic tests/Investigation; Glaucoma; Intraocular pressure; Public health; Telemedicine

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30770354     DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313451

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  3 in total

1.  Determinants of late presentation of glaucoma in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Anakin Chu Kwan Lai; John C Buchan; Jonathan Cheuk-Hung Chan; Winifred Nolan
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2022-09-13       Impact factor: 4.456

2.  A Randomized Trial to Improve Adherence to Follow-up Eye Examinations Among People With Glaucoma.

Authors:  Benjamin E Leiby; Sarah E Hegarty; Tingting Zhan; Jonathan S Myers; L Jay Katz; Julia A Haller; Michael Waisbourd; Christine Burns; Meskerem Divers; Jeanne Molineaux; Jeffrey Henderer; Charles Brodowski; Lisa A Hark
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 3.  Population screening for glaucoma in UK: current recommendations and future directions.

Authors:  Sana Hamid; Parul Desai; Pirro Hysi; Jennifer M Burr; Anthony P Khawaja
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 3.775

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.