lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Underserved diabetic patients with refractive errors insufficient to lead to seeking eyecare
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Medicine and Optometry.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3745-0035
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The increase in prevalence of diabetes is anticipated to increase the numbers of patients needing eye examinations. For our Phase II SBIR data, we reported that for > 2000 underserved diabetic patients in Alameda County, California, > 60% of patients reported no eye examination for at least 3 years despite that free photo diabetic retinopathy screenings were offered with follow on examination and eyecare. If eye screening for diabetic patients is not mandated, it becomes the responsibility of the patient or their primary care physician or endocrinologist to understand and act on the need for eye examinations. Methods: From the Alameda Health system of clinics, 197 diabetic patients agreed to be photoscreened for diabetic retinopathy. Our sample was enriched to have an increased probability of eye complications; thus, 26% had no apparent diabetic retinopathy; 38%, 17% and 4% had mild, moderate and severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy; and 13% had proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Of the 141 patients with diabetic retinopathy, 29% had bilateral CSME. Of the 132 diabetic patients (67 males and 65 females) returning for full eye exams, 52% were Hispanic, 21% African American, 14% Asian, and 8% NonHispanic Caucasian and Other, with an average age of 58.1 ± 9.4 years. Refractive errors were defined as spherical equivalent (SE) refraction, calculated as the spherical power plus one-half of the cylindrical power. Results: The overall mean spherical equivalent refraction M was −0.16 ± 1.50 D in the right eye (−6.0 D to +3.0 D) and +0.14 ± 1.35 D (−7.0 D to +4.0 D) in the left eye. Out of 132 patients, eight patients (6.1%) had visual acuity worse than 0.3 logMAR in both eyes. The right eyes of four patients and left eyes of eight patients had visual acuity worse than 0.3 logMAR, with fellow eyes having normal visual acuity. Conclusions: In a sample of largely minority, working age adults, there was very little refractive error and relatively good visual acuity when refracted, despite diabetic retinopathy or diabetic macular edema. Thus, working age diabetic patients may not regularly seek eye care for spectacle correction that would lead to the detection of diabetic retinopathy or diabetic macular edema.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 2015.
National Category
Ophthalmology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74517OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-74517DiVA, id: diva2:1209918
Conference
ARVO Conference: Diabetic Retinopathy – Battling the Global Epidemic 2015
Available from: 2018-05-24 Created: 2018-05-24 Last updated: 2018-05-24

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Baskaran, Karthikeyan
By organisation
Department of Medicine and Optometry
Ophthalmology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 9 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf