 |
 |

Understanding the Value of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening
Donald S. Fong, MD, MPH;
Justin Gottlieb, MD;
Frederick L. Ferris III, MD;
Ronald Klein, MD, MPH
Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:758-760.
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
Regular dilated eye examinations are an effective approach to detecting
and treating vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy.1
They can help prevent blindness, and they are cost-effective.2-3
Guidelines for systematic screening have been developed because patients with
retinopathy are often asymptomatic, and photocoagulation treatment is more
effective at reducing visual loss when applied at specific, frequently asymptomatic,
stages of retinopathy.4-5 However,
despite the recommendations for regular screening and the availability of
effective treatment, many patients at risk of visual loss due to severe retinopathy
are not receiving dilated eye examinations and needed photocoagulation treatments.6-7
Guidelines for the frequency of dilated eye examinations have been largely
based on the severity of the retinopathy.8-9
For patients with moderate to severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy,
frequent eye examinations are often necessary to determine when to initiate
treatment. However, for patients . . . [Full Text of this Article]
From the Department of Ophthalmology, Southern California Permanente
Medical Group, Baldwin Park (Dr Fong); Department of Ophthalmology and Visual
Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison (Drs Gottlieb and Klein); and the
Division of Biometry and Epidemiology, National Eye Institute, National Institutes
of Health, Bethesda, Md (Dr Ferris).
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Effect of mydriasis and different field strategies on digital image screening of diabetic eye disease
Murgatroyd et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:920-924.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Preventing Visual Loss From Chronic Eye Disease in Primary Care: Scientific Review
Rowe et al.
JAMA 2004;291:1487-1495.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|