Qing Wang, Ives A Valenzuela, Noga Harizman, Prakash Gorroochurn, Desiree R Torres, Stefania C Maruri, Daniel F Diamond, Jason D Horowitz, David S Friedman, C Gustavo De Moraes, George A Cioffi, Jeffrey M Liebmann, Lisa A Hark
{"title":"Glaucoma Screening and Referral Risk Factors in a High-Risk Population: Follow-up Study of the Manhattan Vision Screening Study (NYC-SIGHT).","authors":"Qing Wang, Ives A Valenzuela, Noga Harizman, Prakash Gorroochurn, Desiree R Torres, Stefania C Maruri, Daniel F Diamond, Jason D Horowitz, David S Friedman, C Gustavo De Moraes, George A Cioffi, Jeffrey M Liebmann, Lisa A Hark","doi":"10.1097/IJG.0000000000002521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Prcis: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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 non-mydriatic 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. Chi-squared tests and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors associated with glaucoma referral.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 mmHg 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings support public health approaches that focus community-based eye health screenings on high-risk populations and prioritize underserved communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":15938,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Glaucoma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000002521","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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 non-mydriatic 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. Chi-squared tests and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors associated with glaucoma referral.
Results: 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 mmHg 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 community-based eye health screenings on high-risk populations and prioritize underserved communities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Glaucoma is a peer reviewed journal addressing the spectrum of issues affecting definition, diagnosis, and management of glaucoma and providing a forum for lively and stimulating discussion of clinical, scientific, and socioeconomic factors affecting care of glaucoma patients.