Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in Scotland: research design and methodology

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a potentially blinding condition and a common cause of ocular morbidity. Establishing an accurate estimate of disease incidence and distribution is an important first step in assessing the healthcare burden related to this condition and in subsequent planning and provision of treatment strategies. The aim of this study is to obtain a first estimate incidence of RRD in Scotland, to estimate the incidence of familial RRD and to describe the known associations of RRD within the study population.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>We have established a national prospective observational study seeking to identify and recruit all incident cases of RRD in the Scottish population over a 2 year period. After fully informed consent, all participants will have a blood sample taken and a full medical history and clinical examination performed including visual acuity, refraction, slit-lamp examination, intra-ocular pressure measurement and detailed fundal examination. We describe the study design and protocol.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study will provide the first estimate of the annual incidence of RRD in Scotland. The findings of this study will be important in estimating the burden of disease and in the planning of future health care policy related to this condition. This study will also establish a genetic resource for a genome wide association study to investigate if certain genetic variants predispose to RRD.</p

Care of vision and ocular health in diabetic members of a national diabetes organization: A cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regular examination and early treatment of diabetic retinopathy can prevent visual loss. The aim of the study was to describe the care of vision and ocular health in people with diabetes in Norway.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of a random sample (n = 1,887) of the Norwegian Diabetic Associations' (NDA) members was carried out in 2005. Questions were asked about care of vision and ocular health, history of ocular disease and visual symptoms, general medical history and diabetes management. The study was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The response rate was 74%. Forty-four questionnaires with incomplete data regarding gender, age or type of diabetes were excluded, leaving 1352 cases (52% females) for analysis. 451 (33%) had type 1 and 901 (67%) had type 2 diabetes, the mean duration of diabetes was respectively, 22 (sd ± 14) and 10 (sd ± 9) years. In all 1,052 (78%) had their eyes examined according to guidelines and 1,169 (87%) confirmed to have received information about regular eye examinations. One in two recalled to have received such information from their general practitioner. To have received information about the importance of eye examinations (PR 3.1, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0), and diabetes duration > 10 years (PR 1.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.3), were independently associated with reporting regular eye examinations. A history of diabetic retinopathy was reported by 178 (13%) responders, of which 101 (57%) reported a history of laser treatment. Responders who had regular eye examinations reported more frequently a history of diabetic retinopathy (19% vs. 5%, p < 0.001). The frequency of retinopathy was significantly higher in responders with reported HbA1c values above treatment target (23% vs. 13%, p = 0.001). However, in responders who were not regularly examined, there was no difference in reported frequency of retinopathy with regard to HbA1c level.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Eight out of ten diabetic members of the NDA had their eyes examined according to current guidelines and the majority was well informed about the risk of vision loss due to diabetes. The results indicate that the reported history of diabetic retinopathy likely underestimates the prevalence of retinopathy.</p

Prevalence and progression of visual impairment in patients newly diagnosed with clinical type 2 diabetes: a 6-year follow up study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many diabetic patients fear visual loss as the worst consequence of diabetes. In most studies the main eye pathology is assigned as the cause of visual impairment. This study analysed a broad range of possible ocular and non-ocular predictors of visual impairment prospectively in patients newly diagnosed with clinical type 2 diabetes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were from a population-based cohort of 1,241 persons newly diagnosed with clinical, often symptomatic type 2 diabetes aged ≥ 40 years. After 6 years, 807 patients were followed up. Standard eye examinations were done by practising ophthalmologists.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At diabetes diagnosis median age was 65.5 years. Over 6 years, the prevalence of blindness (visual acuity of best seeing eye ≤ 0.1) rose from 0.9% (11/1,241) to 2.4% (19/807) and the prevalence of moderate visual impairment (> 0.1; < 0.5) rose from 5.4% (67/1,241) to 6.7% (54/807). The incidence (95% confidence interval) of blindness was 40.2 (25.3-63.8) per 10,000 patient-years. Baseline predictors of level of visual acuity (age, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), cataract, living alone, low self-rated health, and sedentary life-style) and speed of continued visual loss (age, AMD, diabetic retinopathy (DR), cataract, living alone, and high fasting triglycerides) were identified.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In a comprehensive assessment of predictors of visual impairment, even in a health care system allowing self-referral to free eye examinations, treatable eye pathologies such as DR and cataract emerge together with age as the most notable predictors of continued visual loss after diabetes diagnosis. Our results underline the importance of eliminating barriers to efficient eye care by increasing patients' and primary care practitioners' awareness of the necessity of regular eye examinations and timely surgical treatment.</p

The Prevalence of Visual Impairment in People with Dementia (the PrOVIDe study): a cross-sectional study of people aged 60–89 years with dementia and qualitative exploration of individual, carer and professional perspectives

Background: The prevalence of visual impairment (VI) and dementia increases with age and these conditions may coexist, but few UK data exist on VI among people with dementia. Objectives: To measure the prevalence of eye conditions causing VI in people with dementia and to identify/describe reasons for underdetection or inappropriate management. Design: Stage 1 – cross-sectional prevalence study. Stage 2 – qualitative research exploring participant, carer and professional perspectives of eye care. Setting: Stage 1 – 20 NHS sites in six English regions. Stage 2 – six English regions. Participants: Stage 1 – 708 participants with dementia (aged 60–89 years): 389 lived in the community (group 1) and 319 lived in care homes (group 2). Stage 2 – 119 participants. Interventions: Stage 1 gathered eye examination data following domiciliary sight tests complying with General Ophthalmic Services requirements and professional guidelines. Cognitive impairment was assessed using the Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (sMMSE) test, and functional ability and behavior were assessed using the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale and Cambridge Behavioural Inventory – Revised. Stage 2 involved individual interviews (36 people with dementia and 11 care workers); and separate focus groups (34 optometrists; 38 family and professional carers). Main outcome measures.: VI defined by visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/12 or worse than 6/18 measured before and after refraction. Results: Stage 1 – when participants wore their current spectacles, VI prevalence was 32.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 28.7% to 36.5%] and 16.3% (95% CI 13.5% to 19.6%) for commonly used criteria for VI of VA worse than 6/12 and 6/18, respectively. Of those with VI, 44% (VA 80% of participants. There was no evidence that the management of VI in people with dementia differed from that in older people in general. Exploratory analysis suggested significant deficits in some vision-related aspects of function and behaviour in participants with VI. Stage 2 key messages – carers and care workers underestimated how much can be achieved in an eye examination. People with dementia and carers were unaware of domiciliary sight test availability. Improved communication is needed between optometrists and carers; optometrists should be informed of the person’s dementia. Tailoring eye examinations to individual needs includes allowing extra time. Optometrists wanted training and guidance about dementia. Correcting VI may improve the quality of life of people with dementia but should be weighed against the risks and burdens of undergoing examinations and cataract surgery on an individual basis. Limitations: Sampling bias is possible owing to quota-sampling and response bias. Conclusions: The prevalence of VI is disproportionately higher in people with dementia living in care homes. Almost 50% of presenting VI is correctable with spectacles, and more with cataract surgery. Areas for future research are the development of an eye-care pathway for people with dementia; assessment of the benefits of early cataract surgery; and research into the feasibility of specialist optometrists for older people