Suppr超能文献

眼科验光师与眼科医生在糖尿病视网膜病变筛查中的比较。

Comparison between an ophthalmic optician and an ophthalmologist in screening for diabetic retinopathy.

作者信息

Hammond C J, Shackleton J, Flanagan D W, Herrtage J, Wade J

机构信息

Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

Eye (Lond). 1996;10 ( Pt 1):107-12. doi: 10.1038/eye.1996.18.

Abstract

The best method of screening for diabetic retinopathy is still debated: fundus photography, general practitioners, hospital physicians and ophthalmic opticians have been advocated. This study compared the performance of an ophthalmic optician with an ophthalmologist, both using mydriatic and slit lamp biomicroscopy and direct ophthalmoscopy. A total of 474 eyes of diabetics in a single group practice were examined by both practitioners at their annual check. There was total agreement about presence or absence of retinopathy in 366 eyes (77%). Although the optician diagnosed less background diabetic retinopathy (83 versus 123 eyes) and diabetic maculopathy (47 eyes versus 63 eyes), he would have referred 20 of 26 eyes with moderate or severe maculopathy and 33 of 36 eyes with moderate or severe background retinopathy: sensitivities of 0.77 and 0.92 respectively. This compares favourably with previous studies and we suggest that ophthalmic opticians with suitable training would be an effective body to screen for diabetic retinopathy.

摘要

糖尿病视网膜病变的最佳筛查方法仍存在争议

有人主张采用眼底摄影、全科医生、医院医生和验光师进行筛查。本研究比较了验光师和眼科医生的检查表现,二者均使用散瞳和裂隙灯生物显微镜检查以及直接检眼镜检查。在一次团体诊疗中,两位从业者对474例糖尿病患者的眼睛进行了年度检查。在366只眼睛(77%)中,二者对视网膜病变的有无判断完全一致。尽管验光师诊断出的轻度糖尿病视网膜病变(83只眼对123只眼)和糖尿病性黄斑病变(47只眼对63只眼)较少,但他会转诊26只中度或重度黄斑病变眼中的20只,以及36只中度或重度轻度视网膜病变眼中的33只:敏感性分别为0.77和0.92。这与之前的研究相比有优势,我们认为经过适当培训的验光师将是筛查糖尿病视网膜病变的有效人员。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验