Barriers and facilitators to diabetic retinopathy screening within Australian primary care

Background Despite recent incentives through Medicare (Australia’s universal health insurance scheme) to increase retinal screening rates in primary care, comprehensive diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening has not been reached in Australia. The current study aimed to identify key factors affecting the delivery of diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in Australian general practices. Methods A descriptive qualitative study involving in-depth interviews was carried out from November 2019 to March 2020. Using purposive snowballing sampling, 15 general practitioners (GPs) were recruited from urban and rural general practices in New South Wales and Western Australia. A semi-structured interview guide was used to collect data from participants. All interviews were conducted over the phone by one facilitator, and each interview lasted up to 45 min. The Socio-Ecological Model was used to inform the content of the interview topic guides and subsequent data analysis. Recorded data were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was conducted to identify and classify recurrent themes. Results Of 15 GPs interviewed, 13 were male doctors, and the mean age was 54.7 ± 15.5 years. Seven participants were practising in urban areas, while eight were practising in regional or remote areas. All participants had access to a direct ophthalmoscope, but none owned retinal cameras. None of the participants reported performing DR screening. Only three participants were aware of the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items 12,325 and 12,326 that allow GPs to bill for retinal screening. Seven themes, a combination of facilitators and barriers, emerged from interviews with the GPs. Despite the strong belief in their role in managing chronic diseases, barriers such as costs of retinal cameras, time constraints, lack of skills to make DR diagnosis, and unawareness of Medicare incentives for non-mydriatic retinal photography made it difficult to conduct DR screening in general practice. However, several enabling strategies to deliver DR screening within primary care include increasing GPs’ access to continuing professional development, subsidising the cost of retinal cameras, and the need for a champion ace to take the responsibility of retinal photography. Conclusion This study identified essential areas at the system level that require addressing to promote the broader implementation of DR screening, in particular, a nationwide awareness campaign to maximise the use of MBS items, improve GPs’ competency, and subsidise costs of the retinal cameras for small and rural general practices.

Pathognomonic macular ripples are revealed by polarized infrared retinal imaging

A pathognomonic macular ripple sign has been reported with scanning laser ophthalmoscopy images in patients with foveal hypoplasia, though the optical basis of this sign is presently unknown. Here we present a case series of seven individuals with foveal hypoplasia (based on spectral domain optical coherence tomography). Each patient underwent infrared scanning laser ophthalmoscopy retinal imaging in both eyes, acquired with and without a polarization filter and assessment for a ripple-like effect in the fovea. On imaging, macular ripples were present in all eyes with foveal hypoplasia when using a polarization filter, but not when imaged without the filter. We conclude that the macular ripple sign is an imaging artifact attributable to the unique pattern of phase retardation of the Henle fiber layer in the setting of foveal hypoplasia. By utilizing a polarization filter with retinal photography, this feature can be exploited to promptly identify foveal hypoplasia in settings where OCT is not possible due to nystagmus.

Gitelman syndrome and ectopic calcification in the retina and joints

ABSTRACT Gitelman syndrome is a rare inherited renal tubular disorder with features that resemble thiazide use, including a hypokalemic metabolic alkalosis, hypomagnesemia, hypocalciuria, a low or normal blood pressure, and hyperreninemia and hyperaldosteronism. Treatment is primarily correction of the K and Mg levels. The diagnosis is confirmed with genetic testing but Gitelman syndrome is often not suspected. However the association with ectopic calcification in the retina, blood vessels and chondrocalcinosis in the joints is a useful pointer to this diagnosis. Bilateral symmetrical whitish deposits of calcium pyrophosphate are visible superotemporally on ophthalmoscopy and retinal photography but are actually located beneath the retina in the sclerochoroid. Optical coherence tomography is even more sensitive for their detection. These deposits increase in size with time, but the rate of progression slows with long-term correction of the hypomagnesemia. Calcification may be complicated by atrophy of the overlying retina and visual loss. The deposits often correlate with ectopic calcification in the aorta, coronary and cerebral vessels. Chondrocalcinosis occurs in the large joints such as the knees. Ectopic calcification in Gitelman syndrome indicates the need for more aggressive management of Ca and Mg levels. Calcification is much less common in Bartter syndrome which itself is rarer and associated less often with hypomagnesemia.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Direct Ophthalmoscopy and Non-Mydriatic Retinal Photography by Trained Optometrists for Screening of Diabetic Retinopathy

Purpose: To determine the reliability of direct ophthalmoscopy and Non-Mydriatic fundus photography for screening of Diabetic Retinopathy by optometrist. Study Design: Observational, cross sectional. Place and Duration of Study: Al-Ibrahim eye hospital, Karachi from October to December 2018. Material and Methods: All individuals with type 2 diabetes of≥ 40 years of age were screened for diabetic retinopathy (DR) by two trained optometrists and an ophthalmologist. First Optometrist used Non Mydriatic Fundus Camera (NMFC) and second optometrist used direct ophthalmoscopy (DO) after dilating the pupils. Final examination was done by the Ophthalmologist with slit lamp using Volk fundus lens which was considered as reference standard. Every investigator was kept unaware of the findings of others. Results: A total of 698 eyes of 349 respondents were screened. Ophthalmologist could not make decision by bio microscopy in 44 (6.3%) individuals as compared to 128 (18.3%) by 1st optometrist by NMFC and 142 (20.3%) by 2nd optometrist with DO. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) was diagnosed in 1493 (21.4%) with slit lamp, in 1172 (16.8%) with NMFC and in 1333 (19.1%) with DO. Sensitivity of NMFC was 76% and that of DO was 64.8%. Specificity of NMFC was 97.45% and that of DO was 96.63%. Positive predictive value (PPV) of NMFC was 89.33% and that of DO was 84.3% Negative predictive value (NPV) of NMFC was 93.33% and that of DO was 90.7%. Conclusion: NMFC is recommended tool for DR screening; but DO by well-trained optometrist can be reliable where neither ophthalmologist nor NMFC is available.