Extending the diabetic retinopathy screening intervals in Singapore: methodology and preliminary findings of a cohort study
Amudha Aravindhan,Eva K. Fenwick,Aurora Wing Dan Chan,Ryan Eyn Kidd Man,Ngiap Chuan Tan,Wei Teen Wong,Wern Fern Soo,Shin Wei Lim,Sabrina Yi-Mei Wee,Charumathi Sabanayagam,Eric Finkelstein,Gavin Tan,Haslina Hamzah,Bibhas Chakraborty,Sanchalika Acharyya,Tai E. Shyong,Peter Scanlon,Tien Yin Wong,Ecosse L. Lamoureux
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18287-2
IF: 4.5
2024-03-13
BMC Public Health
Abstract:Abstract Background The Diabetic Retinopathy Extended Screening Study (DRESS) aims to develop and validate a new DR/diabetic macular edema (DME) risk stratification model in patients with Type 2 diabetes (DM) to identify low-risk groups who can be safely assigned to biennial or triennial screening intervals. We describe the study methodology, participants’ baseline characteristics, and preliminary DR progression rates at the first annual follow-up. Methods DRESS is a 3-year ongoing longitudinal study of patients with T2DM and no or mild non-proliferative DR (NPDR, non-referable) who underwent teleophthalmic screening under the Singapore integrated Diabetic Retinopathy Programme (SiDRP) at four SingHealth Polyclinics. Patients with referable DR/DME (> mild NPDR) or ungradable fundus images were excluded. Sociodemographic, lifestyle, medical and clinical information was obtained from medical records and interviewer-administered questionnaires at baseline. These data are extracted from medical records at 12, 24 and 36 months post-enrollment. Baseline descriptive characteristics stratified by DR severity at baseline and rates of progression to referable DR at 12-month follow-up were calculated. Results Of 5,840 eligible patients, 78.3% ( n = 4,570, median [interquartile range [IQR] age 61.0 [55–67] years; 54.7% male; 68.0% Chinese) completed the baseline assessment. At baseline, 97.4% and 2.6% had none and mild NPDR (worse eye), respectively. Most participants had hypertension (79.2%) and dyslipidemia (92.8%); and almost half were obese (43.4%, BMI ≥ 27.5 kg/m 2 ). Participants without DR (vs mild DR) reported shorter DM duration, and had lower haemoglobin A1c, triglycerides and urine albumin/creatinine ratio (all p < 0.05). To date, we have extracted 41.8% ( n = 1909) of the 12-month follow-up data. Of these, 99.7% ( n = 1,904) did not progress to referable DR. Those who progressed to referable DR status (0.3%) had no DR at baseline. Conclusions In our prospective study of patients with T2DM and non-referable DR attending polyclinics, we found extremely low annual DR progression rates. These preliminary results suggest that extending screening intervals beyond 12 months may be viable and safe for most participants, although our 3-year follow up data are needed to substantiate this claim and develop the risk stratification model to identify low-risk patients with T2DM who can be assigned biennial or triennial screening intervals.
public, environmental & occupational health