Advertisement

Diabetologia

, Volume 57, Issue 7, pp 1332–1338 | Cite as

Validation of a model to estimate personalised screening frequency to monitor diabetic retinopathy

  • Amber A. W. A. van der HeijdenEmail author
  • Iris Walraven
  • Esther van ’t Riet
  • Thor Aspelund
  • Sigrún H. Lund
  • Petra Elders
  • Bettine C. P. Polak
  • Annette C. Moll
  • Jan E. E. Keunen
  • Jacqueline M. Dekker
  • Giel Nijpels
Article

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis

Our study aimed to validate a model to determine a personalised screening frequency for diabetic retinopathy.

Methods

A model calculating a personalised screening interval for monitoring retinopathy based on patients’ risk profile was validated using the data of 3,319 type 2 diabetic patients in the Diabetes Care System West-Friesland, the Netherlands. Two-field fundus photographs were graded according to the EURODIAB coding system. Sight-threatening retinopathy (STR) was considered to be grades 3–5. Validity of the model was assessed using calibration and discrimination measures. We compared model-based time of screening with time of STR diagnosis and calculated the differences in the number of fundus photographs using the model compared with those in annual or biennial screening.

Results

During a mean of 53 months of follow-up, 76 patients (2.3%) developed STR. Using the model, the mean screening interval was 31 months, leading to a reduced screening frequency of 61% compared with annual screening and 23% compared with biennial screening. STR incidence occurred after a mean of 26 months after the model-based time of screening in 67 patients (88.2%). In nine patients (11.8%), STR had developed before the model-based time of screening. The discriminatory ability of the model was good (C-statistic 0.83; 95% CI 0.74, 0.92). Calibration showed that the model overestimated STR risk.

Conclusions/interpretation

A large reduction in retinopathy screening was achieved using the model in this population of patients with a very low incidence of retinopathy. Considering the number of potentially missed cases of STR, there is room for improvement in the model. Use of the model for personalised screening may eventually help to reduce healthcare use and costs of diabetes care.

Keywords

Diabetic retinopathy Retinal screening Screening intervals 

Abbreviations

DCS

Diabetes Care System West-Friesland

STR

Sight-threatening retinopathy

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge M. S. A. Suttorp-Shulten (Department of Ophthalmology, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) for grading of the fundus photographs.

Funding

This study was funded by ZonMw, the Netherlands organisation for health research.

Duality of interest

The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.

Contribution statement

AAWAvdH was involved in the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data and drafting of the manuscript. IW was involved in the analysis and interpretation of the data and drafting of the manuscript. EvtR, TA, SHL, PE, BCPP, ACM, JEEK, JMD and GN were involved in the interpretation of the data and revision of the manuscript. GN was involved in the conception of the study, interpretation of the data and revision of the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript. AAWAvdH and IW are the guarantors of this work, had full access to the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Supplementary material

125_2014_3246_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (73 kb)
ESM Methods (PDF 73 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Ding J, Wong TY (2012) Current epidemiology of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema. Curr Diab Rep 12:346–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chalk D, Pitt M, Vaidya B, Stein K (2012) Can the retinal screening interval be safely increased to 2 years for type 2 diabetic patients without retinopathy? Diabetes Care 35:1663–1668PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Olafsdottir E, Stefansson E (2007) Biennial eye screening in patients with diabetes without retinopathy: 10-year experience. Br J Ophthalmol 91:1599–1601PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rodbard HW, Blonde L, Braithwaite SS et al (2007) American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the management of diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract 13(Suppl 1):1–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scanlon PH (2008) The English national screening programme for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy. J Med Screen 15:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheung N, Mitchell P, Wong TY (2010) Diabetic retinopathy. Lancet 376:124–136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mehlsen J, Erlandsen M, Poulsen PL, Bek T (2011) Identification of independent risk factors for the development of diabetic retinopathy requiring treatment. Acta Ophthalmol 89:515–521PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stratton IM, Kohner EM, Aldington SJ et al (2001) UKPDS 50: risk factors for incidence and progression of retinopathy in Type II diabetes over 6 years from diagnosis. Diabetologia 44:156–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zavrelova H, Hoekstra T, Alssema M et al (2011) Progression and regression: distinct developmental patterns of diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes treated in the Diabetes Care System West-Friesland, the Netherlands. Diabetes Care 34:867–872PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Agardh E, Tababat-Khani P (2011) Adopting 3-year screening intervals for sight-threatening retinal vascular lesions in type 2 diabetic subjects without retinopathy. Diabetes Care 34:1318–1319PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kohner EM, Stratton IM, Aldington SJ, Holman RR, Matthews DR (2001) Relationship between the severity of retinopathy and progression to photocoagulation in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus in the UKPDS (UKPDS 52). Diabet Med 18:178–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Looker HC, Nyangoma SO, Cromie DT et al (2013) Predicted impact of extending the screening interval for diabetic retinopathy: the Scottish Diabetic Retinopathy Screening programme. Diabetologia 56:1716–1725PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Porta M, Maurino M, Severini S et al (2013) Clinical characteristics influence screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy. Diabetologia 56:2147–2152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stratton IM, Aldington SJ, Taylor DJ, Adler AI, Scanlon PH (2013) A simple risk stratification for time to development of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 36:580–585PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vijan S, Hofer TP, Hayward RA (2000) Cost–utility analysis of screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. JAMA 283:889–896PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Younis N, Broadbent DM, Vora JP, Harding SP (2003) Incidence of sight-threatening retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes in the Liverpool Diabetic Eye Study: a cohort study. Lancet 361:195–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aspelund T, Thornorisdottir O, Olafsdottir E et al (2011) Individual risk assessment and information technology to optimise screening frequency for diabetic retinopathy. Diabetologia 54:2525–2532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Welschen LM, van Oppen P, Dekker JM, Bouter LM, Stalman WA, Nijpels G (2007) The effectiveness of adding cognitive behavioural therapy aimed at changing lifestyle to managed diabetes care for patients with type 2 diabetes: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health 7:74PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus (2003) Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 26(Suppl 1):S5–S20Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aldington SJ, Kohner EM, Meuer S, Klein R, Sjolie AK (1995) Methodology for retinal photography and assessment of diabetic retinopathy: the EURODIAB IDDM complications study. Diabetologia 38:437–444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Crowson CS, Atkinson EJ, Therneau TM (2013) Assessing calibration of prognostic risk scores. Stat Methods Med Res. doi: 10.1177/0962280213497434 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB (1996) Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 15:361–387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ruamviboonsuk P, Teerasuwanajak K, Tiensuwan M, Yuttitham K (2006) Interobserver agreement in the interpretation of single-field digital fundus images for diabetic retinopathy screening. Ophthalmology 113:826–832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Healy R, Sallam A, Jones V et al (2013) Agreement between photographic screening and hospital biomicroscopy grading of diabetic retinopathy and maculopathy. Eur J Ophthalmol. doi: 10.5301/ejo.5000404 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amber A. W. A. van der Heijden
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Iris Walraven
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • Esther van ’t Riet
    • 1
    • 4
  • Thor Aspelund
    • 5
  • Sigrún H. Lund
    • 5
  • Petra Elders
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bettine C. P. Polak
    • 1
    • 4
  • Annette C. Moll
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jan E. E. Keunen
    • 6
  • Jacqueline M. Dekker
    • 1
    • 4
  • Giel Nijpels
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.EMGO Institute for Health and Care ResearchVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of General PracticeVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of OphthalmologyVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  5. 5.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of IcelandReykjavikIceland
  6. 6.Department of OphthalmologyUniversity Medical Center St RadboudNijmegenthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations