You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 117 No. 6, June 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Epidemiology and Biostatistics
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on ISI (6)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Endocrine Diseases
 •Diabetes Mellitus
 •Diabetic Retinopathy
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Practice Patterns in Diabetic Retinopathy

Part 1: Analysis of Retinopathy Follow-up

John J. Khadem, MD, MPH; Sheldon M. Buzney, MD; Kate S. Alich, MS, RD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:815-820.

Objective  To evaluate ophthalmologists' management of diabetic patients.

Methods  A multiple-choice questionnaire was mailed to all ophthalmologists in New York (1985), Florida (1990), and Massachusetts (1993 and 1996). Questions included practice patterns, methods used in examination, use of photography and fluorescein angiography, indications for laser treatment, and intervals for follow-up of selected conditions. Responses were tabulated and compared between surveys and with the American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern.

Results  In this first report, we detail follow-up patterns of various grades of retinopathy. Physicians increasingly used duration of diabetes as a criterion in determining the length of follow-up for adults, despite persistent ambiguities for children. There were notable changes over time in nearly all aspects of follow-up for both general ophthalmologists and retina specialists. Retina specialists were less likely to treat proliferative disease, more likely to follow up patients with preproliferative disease sooner, and used longer follow-up intervals for short-duration diabetic patients, whereas a small percentage of general ophthalmologists continued to recommend treatment for background disease.

Conclusion  There were noticeable trends toward Diabetes 2000 recommendations over time, although there remained many areas where further education appeared warranted.


From the Massachusetts Society of Eye Physicians and Surgeons, Retina Specialists of Boston, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School (Drs Khadem and Buzney), and Massachusetts Department of Public Health (Ms Alich), Boston. The authors have no proprietary interest in the materials mentioned in this article.







HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1999 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.