Follow-up in a point-of-care diabetic retinopathy program in Pittsburgh: a non-concurrent retrospective cohort study

Background: The Point-of-Care Diabetic Retinopathy Examination Program (POCDREP) was initiated in 2015 at the University of Pittsburgh/UPMC in response to low diabetic retinopathy (DR) examination rates, a condition affecting a quarter of people with diabetes mellitus (PwDM) and leading to blindness. Early detection and treatment are critical with DR prevalence projected to triple by 2050. Approximately, half of PwDM in the U.S. undergo yearly examinations, and there are reported varying follow-up rates with eye care professionals, with limited data on the factors influencing these trends. POCDREP aimed to address screening and follow-up gap, partnering with diverse healthcare entities, including primary care sites, free clinics, and federally qualified health centers.

Methods: A non-concurrent retrospective cohort study spanning 2015-2018 examined data using electronic health records of patients who underwent retinal imaging. Imaging was performed using 31 cameras across various settings, with results interpreted by ophthalmologists. Follow-up recommendations were made for cases with vision-threatening DR (VTDR), incidental findings, or indeterminate results. Factors influencing follow-up were analyzed, including demographic, clinical, and imaging-related variables. We assessed the findings at follow-up of patients with indeterminate results.

Results: Out of 7,733 examinations (6,242 patients), 32.25% were recommended for follow-up. Among these, 5.57% were classified as having VTDR, 14.34% had other ocular findings such as suspected glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and 12.13% were indeterminate. Of those recommended for follow-up, only 30.87% were assessed by eye care within six months. Older age, marriage, and severe DR were associated with higher odds of following up. Almost two thirds (64.35%) of the patients with indeterminate exams were found with a vision-threatening disease at follow-up.

Conclusion: The six-month follow-up rate was found to be suboptimal. Influential factors for follow-up included age, marital status, and the severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR). While the program successfully identified a range of ocular conditions, screening initiatives must extend beyond mere disease detection. Ensuring patient follow-up is crucial to DR preventing programs mission. Recommended strategies to improve follow-up adherence include education, incentives, and personalized interventions. Additional research is necessary to pinpoint modifiable factors that impact adherence and to develop targeted interventions.