in the grading by OptoMize (most left), and the scoring used for the purpose of this study (most right).
For analysis in this study, referable DR is defined as participants with preproliferative (graded as R2), proliferative retinopathy (R3) and/or maculopathy (M1). Referable DR relates to those who need to be referred to the hospital eye service for further assessment or treatment. The retinal images were considered ungradable if they are unclear or unassessable and they were scored as 8 for analysis.
Grades in OptoMIze Criteria description Scores used in this study
R0 M0 No DR present 0
R1 M0 Background DR, no maculopathy 1
R1 M1 Maculopathy with/without background DR 2
R2 M0 Pre-proliferative DR, no maculopathy 3
R2 M1 Pre-proliferative…show more content… Category Description
1 Patients who were not referred, just invited for routine screening next year (Annual Recall)
2 Patients who were referred to Hospital Eye Service due to DR
3 Patients who were referred to Hospital Eye Service or GP due to other non-DR eye disease (e.g. cataract, glaucoma, AMD)
4 Patients referred to digital surveillance or slit lamp exam for further assessment and monitoring.
5 Patients who missed the annual screening because they were under care of ophthalmologist.
6 Patients who did not attend the screening for undefined reason.
7 Patients who were out of the screening programmes as they opted-out / inactivated annual screening / moved to other area / no longer diabetic.
Table 2.3 Scoring guide for DR grading outcome
2.10 Statistical methods
All data retrieved from the screening database were entered into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS Version 23 (SPSS IBM Inc, Chicago USA). Significance was taken as P<0.05 unless otherwise stated.
Descriptive analyses were undertaken using Microsoft Excel and SPSS to describe the study population and patterns of DR. Participant demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline were summarized by group using means and SDs, medians or percentages accordingly. The normality of data was checked using Shapiro-Wilk test on DR grades, outcomes and visual acuities for all years from 2008 to 2015. All data were not