Premium
Improving diabetic retinal clinics in a district general hospital to conform to UK national screening committee guidelines
Author(s) -
MALIK A,
MOORE SJ,
PAUL B,
ISLAM N
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2012.s035.x
Subject(s) - medicine , diabetic retinopathy , logbook , audit , laser coagulation , emergency medicine , pediatrics , ophthalmology , optometry , diabetes mellitus , visual acuity , oceanography , management , endocrinology , economics , geology
Purpose To determine if new diabetic retinopathy patients, with either ‘urgent’ (R3M0, R3M1) or ‘routine’ (R2M1, R1M1) grading, are lasered within the appropriate national guidelines timeframe for: Time between listing (clinic) and first laser treatment following screening (OBJECTIVE 11) ‐ Urgent: Minimum standard 90% of patients<2 wks ‐ Routine: Minimum standard 70% of patients<10 wks Time between screening encounter and first laser treatment (OBJECTIVE 12) ‐ Urgent: Minimum standard 70% of patients<6 wks ‐ Routine: Minimum standard 70% of patients<15 wks Methods A retrospective audit of new patients (n=121) whom have undergone diabetic retinal laser for either R3 (proliferative retinopathy) or M1 (maculopathy), over a 6 month period (from 1st feb 2011 to 31st July 2011). Data collection method: ‐ Laser logbook ‐ Patient computer archives system ‐ Systematic review of patient’s notes Patients were excluded if: ‐ CRVO diagnosis ‐ already under Hospital eye services ‐ repeat laser attenders ‐ no data ‐ ungradeable Results ‐ No. eyes lasered in time /No. eyes seen (%) OBJECTIVE 11 (clinic to laser): Urgent ‐ 17/31 (55%) Routine ‐ 117/135 (87%) OBJECTIVE 12 (screening to laser): Urgent ‐ 12/32 (38%) Routine ‐ 90/135 (70%) Conclusion Standards achieved for routine but not urgent referrals for Objective 11 (clinic to laser time) and Objective 12 (screening to laser time). The appointment of a diabetic co‐ordinator helps to greatly improve flow of diabetic patient care pathway. Implementing the use of a medisoft connector would aid stream‐lining data transfer directly to the screening service, thus improving the quality of patient care.