Screening uptake in a well-established diabetic retinopathy screening program the role of geographical access and deprivation

Diabetes Care

Volumn 31, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 2131-2135

  Leese, Graham P ^a   Boyle, Paul ^b   Zhiqiang, Feng ^b   Emslie Smith, Alistair ^a   Ellis, John D ^a  

^a NINEWELLS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; DISEASE DURATION; EYE PHOTOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE AVAILABILITY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; RURAL AREA; SCORING SYSTEM; SCREENING TEST; SEX DIFFERENCE; URBAN AREA; HEALTH; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ATTITUDE; SOCIOECONOMICS; STATISTICS; UNITED KINGDOM; VISION TEST;

AGED; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; RURAL HEALTH; SCOTLAND; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; URBAN HEALTH; VISION SCREENING;

EID: 59249099447     PISSN: 01495992     EISSN: 19355548     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2337/dc08-1098     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, Shah G: Utility values and diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol 128:324-330, 1999
2. Facey K, Cummins E, Macpherson K, Morris A, Reay L, Slattery J: Organisation of services for diabetic retinopathy screening. In Health Technology Assessment Report 1. Glasgow, Scottland, Health Technology Board for Scotland, 2002, p. 231-273
3. National Screening Committee (U.K.): Diabetic retinopathy [Web page], 2008 Available at http://www.retinalscreening.nhs.uk/pages/.Accessed 26 October 2007
4. National Screening Division: Diabetic retinopathy screening. Available at www. ndrs.scot.nhs.uk. Accessed 26 October 2007
5. NICE Report: Management of type 2 diabetes: retinopathy screening and early management [article online], 2002. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/ guidance/CGE. Accessed 26 October 2007
6. Scanlon PH, Malhotra R, Greenwood RH, Aldington SJ, Foy C, Flatman M, Downes S: Comparison of two reference standards in validating two field mydriatic digital photography as a method of screening for diabetic retinopathy. Br J Ophthalmol 87: 1258-1263, 2003
7. Olson JA, Strachan FM, HipwellJH, Goat- man KA, McHardy KC, Forrester JV, Sharp PF: A comparative evaluation of digital imaging, retinal photography and optometrist examination in screening for diabetic retinopathy. Diabet Med 20:528-534, 2003
8. Murgatroyd H, Ellingford A, Cox A, Binnie M, Ellis JD, MacEwen CJ, Leese GP: Effect of mydriasis and different field strategies on digital image screening of diabetic eye disease. Br J Ophthalmol 88:920-924, 2004
9. Rhatigan MC, Leese GP, Ellis J, Ellingford A, Morris AD, Newton RW, Roxburgh S: Blindness in patients with diabetes who have been screened for eye disease. Eye 13:166-169, 1999
10. Cormack TG, Grant B, Macdonald MJ, Steel J, Campbell IW: Incidence of blindness due to diabetic eye disease in Fife 1990 -9. Br J Ophthalmol 85:354-356, 2001
11. Javitt JC: Cost savings associated with detection and treatment of diabetic eye disease. Pharmacoeconomics 8 (Suppl. 1):33- 39, 1995
12. Leese GP, Ahmed S, Newton RW, Jung RT, Ellingford A, Baines P, Roxburgh S, Coleiro J: Screening for diabetic retinopathy using a mobile unit housing a non- mydriatic camera: differences in rural and urban areas. Br Med J 306:187-189, 1993
13. Leese GP, Morris AD, Petrie J, Jung RT, Ellis JD: Diabetic retinopathy screening and ophthalmology workload. Diabet Med 23:449-450, 2006
14. Carstairs V, Morris R: Deprivation and Health in Scotland. Aberdeen, Scottland, Aberdeen University Press, 1991
15. Hope S, Braunholtz S, Playfair A, Dudle- stone A, Ingram D, Martin C: Scotland's People Results From the 1999 Scottish Household Survey. Vol. 1. Annual Report. Edinburgh, U.K., HMSO, 2001
16. Mohamed Q, Gillies MC, Wong TY: Management of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review. JAMA 298:902-916, 2007
17. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN): Management of diabetes: SIGN 55: a national clinical guideline [article online], 2001. Edinburgh, U.K., SIGN Executive, Royal College of Physicians. Available at www.sign.ac.uk. Accessed 26 October 2007
18. Hurley SF, Jolley DJ, Livingston PM, Reading D, Coickburn J, Flint-Richter D: Effectiveness, costs and cost-effectiveness of recruitment strategies for a mammo- graphic screening program to detect breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:855-863, 1992
19. Esker S, Adami HO, Granath F, Wilander E, Sparén P: A large population-based randomized controlled trial to increase attendance at screening for cervical cancer. Cancer Epidemiolo Biomarkers Prev 13:346-354, 2004
20. Fox SA, Siu AL, Stein JA: The importance of physician communication on breast cancer screening of older women. Arch Int Med 154:2058-2068, 1994
21. Austoker J, Ong G: Written information needs of women who are recalled for further investigation of breast screening: results of a multicentre study. J Med Screening 1:238-244, 1994
22. Sin JP, St. Leger AS: Interventions to increase breast screening uptake: do they make a difference. J Med Screening 6:170-181, 1999
23. Segura JM, Castells X, Casamitjana M, Macia F, Porta M, Katz SJ: A randomised controlled trial comparing three invitation strategies in a breast cancer screening program. Prev Med 33:325-332, 2001
24. Ratner PA, Bottorff JL, Johnson JL, Cook R, Lovato CY: A meta-analysis of mam- mography screening promotion. Cancer Detect Prev 25:147-160, 2001
25. Jones HE, Wong CJ, Tuten M, Stitzer ML: Reinforcement-based therapy: 12-month evaluation of an outpatient drug free treatment for heroin abusers. Drug Alcohol Depend 79:119-128, 2005