Barriers to and Facilitators of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Utilization in a High-Risk Population
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is among the leading causes of vision loss in the USA, yet an estimated 50% of patients with diabetes do not receive recommended annual screening eye exams. Patients with diabetes and low socioeconomic status or who are racial/ethnic minorities are at increased risk for vision loss.
Qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 patients with diabetes at a federally qualified community health center in an urban area regarding factors influencing their use of screening. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed line by line to identify themes. The themes were organized in a theoretical framework of factors influencing receipt of screening.
The median age of participants was 57.5 (range 44–73). Ten participants identified as female and 14 as male. Participants identified as Black (14), White (4), Hispanic (3), and other/no answer (3). Twenty-three had health insurance. Twenty-three had received an eye exam within in the past year, and 17 reported that they receive eye exams at least yearly. Four hundred fifteen comments were analyzed, and 22 concepts were identified under 7 broader themes and two overarching categories of individual and structural factors. Themes included vision status, competing concerns, emotional context, resource availability, in-clinic experience, cues to action, and knowledge about diabetes.
The factors that influence diabetic retinopathy screening utilization are complex. Visual symptoms and the need for glasses are important facilitators of screening. Many patients lack knowledge about diabetic retinopathy and the utility of preventative eye care. New strategies for engaging high-risk populations are necessary.
KeywordsDiabetic retinopathy Health disparities Qualitative research Diabetes Diabetic eye screening Ophthalmology
We would like to thank the participants for giving their time and sharing their experiences, the Cornell Scott Hill Health Center for accommodating us, and the Yale Center for Research and Engagement for their insight into the greater New Haven community.
Data Access, Responsibility, and Analysis
Both authors E.F. and K.N. had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Author E.F. collected, analyzed, and interpreted the data and prepared the article. Author K.N. conceived and designed the study, interpreted the data, and provided critical revision of the article.
This work was financially supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (CTSA Grant Number UL1 TR001863) and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Award Number T35DK104689).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
- 1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2017.Google Scholar
- 5.IDF Diabetes Atlast, 8th Edition [Internet]. 8th ed. Internal Diabetes Federation; 2017. Available from: www.diabetesatlas.org.
- 9.Preferred practice pattern: diabetic retinopathy [Internet]. American Academy of Ophthalmology. 2014 Updated 2017. Available from: www.aao.org/ppp.
- 15.Elam AR, Lee PP. Barriers to and suggestions on improving utilization of eye care in high-risk individuals: focus group results. Int Sch Res Notices [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Apr 9];2014. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4897391/.
- 17.Curry L, Nunez-Smith M. Mixed Methods in Health Sciences Research: A Practical Primer. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2014.Google Scholar
- 18.Cornell Scott Hill Health Corporation Fact Sheet [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Apr 9]. Available from: https://www.cornellscott.org/documents/resources/FactSheet.pdf.
- 19.Evers J, Boer F de. The Qualitative Interview: Art and Skill. 1st ed. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing; 2012.Google Scholar
- 20.Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. reprint. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.Google Scholar
- 23.Becker MH. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Thorofare: Slack; 1974.Google Scholar
- 31.Singh RP, Scott IU. Using EHR tools to optimize ophthalmologic outcomes in patients with diabetes. Retina Today [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jun 28]; Available from: http://retinatoday.com/2016/09/using-ehr-tools-to-optimize-ophthalmologic-outcomes-in-patients-with-diabetes/.
- 33.Policy statement: improving access to vision care in community health centers [Internet]. American Public Health Association; 2009 Nov. Report No.: 200910. Available from: https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2014/07/31/08/14/improving-access-to-vision-care-in-community-health-centers
- 34.Shin P, Finnegan B. Assessing the need for on-site eye care professionals in community health centers [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services; 2009 Feb p. 1–23. Report No.: 22. Available from: https://hsrc.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/sphhs_policy_briefs/22. Accessed 8 Apr 2018.