Validity of Self-Report in Type 1 Diabetic Subjects for Laser Treatment of Retinopathy

Publication Description
Purpose This study sought to determine the validity of self-report of prior panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and focal photocoagulation (FP) compared with fundus photography. Design Prospective cohort study. Participants One thousand three hundred sixty-three type 1 diabetic subjects from the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study, a subset of the 1441 subjects originally enrolled in the multicenter Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Methods At each annual visit, subjects were asked by EDIC staff whether they had undergone PRP, FP, or both since the last completed annual clinic visit. Fundus photographs were collected from one quarter of the cohort each year and from the entire cohort at EDIC years 4 and 10. Photographs were graded for the presence and extent of PRP and FP. Seventeen years of subject reporting and photograph grading of PRP and FP were compared in EDIC subjects. Main Outcome Measures The κ, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for subject-reported PRP and FP. Factors influencing subject misreporting were investigated. Results For subject reporting, 1244 (96%) of 1296 subjects with gradable photographs accurately reported whether they had a history of PRP in one or both eyes, and 1259 (97.5%) of 1291 with valid photographs correctly reported their history of FP. For PRP and FP, sensitivities were 90.4% and 74.0%, respectively; specificities were 96.0% and 98.8%, respectively; positive predictive values were 75.9% and 80.3%, respectively; negative predictive values were 98.9% and 98.4%, respectively; and κ values were 0.80 and 0.76, respectively. Risk factors associated with misreporting included prior laser for diabetic retinopathy and prior ocular surgery (each P <0.04). Conclusions For subjects with type 1 diabetes, in the absence of a clinical examination or fundus photographs, subject self-report could be a reliable tool in a well-monitored study for assessing laser treatment type in diabetic retinopathy. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Primary Author
Grassi,Michael A., M.D.
Sun,Wanjie, PhD.
Gangaputra, Sapna,M.D., M.P.H.
Cleary,Patricia A., M.S.
Hubbard,Larry, M.A.T.
Lachin,John M., ScD.
Gao,Xiaoyu, B.S.
Kiss,Szilárd, M.D.
Barkmeier,Andrew J., M.D.
Almony,Arghavan, M.D.
Davis,Matthew, M.D.
Klein,Ronald, M.D.
Danis,Ronald P., M.D.

Volume
120

Issue
12

Start Page
2580

Other Pages
2586

Publisher
Elsevier Inc

URL
https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0161642013004934 https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0161642013004934



Reference Type
Journal Article

Periodical Full
Ophthalmology

Publication Year
2013

Place of Publication
United States

ISSN/ISBN
0161-6420

Document Object Index
10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.06.002