Glaucoma Screening and Referral Risk Factors in a High-Risk Population: Follow-Up Study of the Manhattan Vision Screening Study.
Qing Wang, Ives A Valenzuela, Noga Harizman, Prakash Gorroochurn, Desiree R Torres, Stefania C Maruri, Daniel F Diamond, Jason D Horowitz, David S Friedman, Moraes C Gustavo De, George A Cioffi, Jeffrey M Liebmann, Lisa A Hark
Summary
Our findings support public health approaches that focus on community-based eye health screenings in high-risk populations and prioritize underserved communities.
Abstract
PRCIS
Community-based eye health screenings that incorporated fundus photography and optometric exams in a high-risk NYC population effectively identified a higher than average number of participants that required an in-office glaucoma evaluation.
PURPOSE
To report glaucoma screening rates and risk factors associated with referral for in-office glaucoma evaluation in the Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study (NYC-SIGHT).
METHODS
In this 5-year, cluster-randomized clinical trial, eligible individuals aged 40 and older were recruited from affordable housing developments and senior centers. Visual acuity with correction, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements, and nonmydriatic fundus photography were conducted. Images were graded by a glaucoma specialist; those with an abnormal image were referred; those who failed the screening or had an unreadable fundus image were examined by the study optometrist. χ 2 tests and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors associated with glaucoma referral.
RESULTS
Totally, 708 participants were screened; 189 (26.6%) were referred for an in-office glaucoma evaluation due to an abnormal optic disc image (n=138) or abnormal optometric exam (n=51). Those referred had a mean age 68.5±11.7 years and were 60% female, 57% Black, and 37% Hispanic. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression showed participants with self-reported glaucoma (OR: 8.096, 95%
CI
4.706-13.928, P =0.000), IOP > 23 mm Hg at the screening (OR: 3.944, 95%
CI
1.704-9.128, P =0.001), or wore prescription eyeglasses (OR: 1.601, 95%
CI
1.034-2.48, P =0.035) had higher odds of being referred for an in-office glaucoma evaluation. Of those referred, 106 (56%) attended, 36 participants (34%) were diagnosed with glaucoma and 38 participants (35.8%) as glaucoma suspects.
CONCLUSION
Our findings support public health approaches that focus on community-based eye health screenings in high-risk populations and prioritize underserved communities.
More by Qing Wang
View full profile →Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study (NYC-SIGHT): Baseline Results and Costs of a Cluster-Randomized Trial.
American Glaucoma Society-American Academy of Ophthalmology Position Statement on Nicotinamide Use for Glaucoma Neuroprotection.
The ICD-10 Glaucoma Severity Score Underestimates the Extent of Glaucomatous Optic Nerve Damage.
Top Research in IOP & Medical Therapy
Browse all →The Complications of Myopia: A Review and Meta-Analysis.
Inflammation in Glaucoma: From the back to the front of the eye, and beyond.
Treatment Outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 1 Year of Follow-up.
In the Knowledge Library
Discussion
Comments and discussion will appear here in a future update.