Validation of the electronic mailing of retinographs of diabetic patients in order to detect retinopathy in primary care;Validación de la transmisión por correo electrónico de la retinografía de pacientes diabéticos para detectar retinopatía en atención primaria

Atencion Primaria

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 119-123

  Molina Fernández, Eduardo ^a,e   Valero Moll, M Sacramento ^b   Pedregal González, Miguel ^a   Calvo Lozano, José ^c   Sánchez Ramos, José Luis ^d   Díaz Rodríguez, Eusebio ^b   Uceda Torres, Rosario ^b  

^a Distrito Sanitario Huelva Costa   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL JUAN RAMÓN JIMÉNEZ   (Spain)

^c Centro de Salud Molino de la Vega   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF HUELVA   (Spain)

^e Hospital Vazquez Diaz   (Spain)

Author keywords

Diabetes mellitus type 2; Diabetic retinopathy; Diagnostic thechniques ophthalmological; Evaluation studies; Reference standard

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMICROSCOPY; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; DIABETIC PATIENT; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; E-MAIL; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; KAPPA STATISTICS; MYDRIASIS; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; PARALLEL DESIGN; PHOTOGRAPHY; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; RETINOGRAPHY; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 42149114513     PISSN: 02126567     EISSN: 15781275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1157/13116625     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Lalaurie Dubernet F, Martín Hernández E. Consideraciones oftalmológicas sobre la evolución de la ceguera en España. Integración. 1999;29:12-6.
2. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Early photocoagulation for diabetic retinopathy: ETDRS report number 9. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:766-85.
3. Harding SP, Broadbent DM, Neoh C, White MC, Vora J. Sensibility and specificity of photography and direct ophthalmoscopy in screening for sight threatening eye disease: the Liverpool Diabetic Eye Study. BMJ. 1995;311:1131-5.
4. Ryder REJ. Screening for diabetic retinopathy in the 21st century. Diabet Med. 1998;15:721-2.
5. Silva Ayçaguer LC. Muestreo para la investigación en ciencias de la salud. Madrid: Díaz de Santos; 1993.
6. Argimon Pallás JM, Jiménez Villa J. Métodos de investigación clínica y epidemiológica. Madrid: Harcourt; 2000.
7. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Grading diabetic retinopathy from stereoscopic color fundus photographs. An extension of the modified Airlie House Classification. ETDRS report no. 10. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:786-806.
8. Aldington SJ, Kohner EM, Meuer S, Sjolie A-K, The EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study Group. Methodology for retinal photography and assessment of diabetic retinopathy: the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study. Diabetologia. 1995;38:437-44.
9. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for cetegorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-74.
10. Working Party of the British Diabetic Association. A British Diabetic Association Report. 1997.
11. Baeza Díaz M, Gil Guillén V, Orozco Beltrán D, Pedrera Carbonell V, Ribera Montes C, Pérez Pons LI, et al. Validez de la cámara no midriática en el cribado de la retinopatía diabética y análisis de indicadores de riesgo de la retinopatía. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2004;79:433-42.
12. Murgatroyd H, Ellingford A, Cox A, Binnie M, Ellis JD, MacEwen CJ, et al. Effect of mydriasis and diferent field strategies on digital image screening of diabetic eye disease. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88:920-4.
13. Harding SP, Broadbent DM, Neoh C, White MC, Vora J. Sensibility and specificity of photography and direct ophthalmoscopy in screening for sight threatening eye disease: the Liverpool Diabetic Eye Study. BMJ. 1995;311:1131-5.
14. Lawrence MG. The accuracy of digital-video retinal imaging to screen for diabetic retinopathy: an analysis of two digital-video retinal imaging systems using standard stereoscopic seven-field photography and dilated clinical examination as reference standards. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2004;102:321-40.
15. Scanlon PH, Malhotra R, Greenwood RH, Aldington SJ, Foy C, Flatman M, et al. Comparison of two reference standards in validating two field mydriatic digital photography as a method of screening for diabetic retinopathy. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:1258-63.
16. Scanlon PH, Malhotra R, Thomas G, Foy C, Kirkpatrick JN, Lewis-Barned N, et al. The effectiveness of screening for diabetic retinopathy by digital imaging photography and technician ophthalmoscopy. Diabet Med. 2003;20:467-74.
17. Olson JA, Strachan FM, Hipwell JH, Goatman KA, McHardy KC, Forrester JV, et al. A comparative evaluation of digital imaging, retinal photography and optometrist examination in screening for diabetic retinopathy. Diabet Med. 2003;20:528-34.
18. Stellingwerf C, Hardus PL, Hooymans JM. Two-field photography can identify patiens with vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy: a screening approach in the primary care setting. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:2086-90.
19. Perrier M, Boucher MC, Angioi K, Gresset JA, Olivier S. Comparison of two, three and four 45 degrees image fields obtained with the Topcon CRW6 nonmydriatic camera for screening for diabetic retinopathy. Can J Ophthalmol. 2003;38:569-74.
20. Moller F, Hansen M, Sjolie AK. Is one 60 degrees fundus photograph sufficient for screening of proliferative diabetic retinopathy? Diabetes Care. 2001;24:2083-5.
21. Herbert HM, Jordan K, Flanagan DW. Is screening with digital imaging using one retinal view adequate? Eye. 2003;17:497-500.