29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevalence and progression of visual impairment in patients newly diagnosed with clinical type 2 diabetes: a 6-year follow up study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Many diabetic patients fear visual loss as the worst consequence of diabetes. In most studies the main eye pathology is assigned as the cause of visual impairment. This study analysed a broad range of possible ocular and non-ocular predictors of visual impairment prospectively in patients newly diagnosed with clinical type 2 diabetes.

          Methods

          Data were from a population-based cohort of 1,241 persons newly diagnosed with clinical, often symptomatic type 2 diabetes aged ≥ 40 years. After 6 years, 807 patients were followed up. Standard eye examinations were done by practising ophthalmologists.

          Results

          At diabetes diagnosis median age was 65.5 years. Over 6 years, the prevalence of blindness (visual acuity of best seeing eye ≤ 0.1) rose from 0.9% (11/1,241) to 2.4% (19/807) and the prevalence of moderate visual impairment (> 0.1; < 0.5) rose from 5.4% (67/1,241) to 6.7% (54/807). The incidence (95% confidence interval) of blindness was 40.2 (25.3-63.8) per 10,000 patient-years. Baseline predictors of level of visual acuity (age, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), cataract, living alone, low self-rated health, and sedentary life-style) and speed of continued visual loss (age, AMD, diabetic retinopathy (DR), cataract, living alone, and high fasting triglycerides) were identified.

          Conclusions

          In a comprehensive assessment of predictors of visual impairment, even in a health care system allowing self-referral to free eye examinations, treatable eye pathologies such as DR and cataract emerge together with age as the most notable predictors of continued visual loss after diabetes diagnosis. Our results underline the importance of eliminating barriers to efficient eye care by increasing patients' and primary care practitioners' awareness of the necessity of regular eye examinations and timely surgical treatment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002.

          This paper presents estimates of the prevalence of visual impairment and its causes in 2002, based on the best available evidence derived from recent studies. Estimates were determined from data on low vision and blindness as defined in the International statistical classification of diseases, injuries and causes of death, 10th revision. The number of people with visual impairment worldwide in 2002 was in excess of 161 million, of whom about 37 million were blind. The burden of visual impairment is not distributed uniformly throughout the world: the least developed regions carry the largest share. Visual impairment is also unequally distributed across age groups, being largely confined to adults 50 years of age and older. A distribution imbalance is also found with regard to gender throughout the world: females have a significantly higher risk of having visual impairment than males. Notwithstanding the progress in surgical intervention that has been made in many countries over the last few decades, cataract remains the leading cause of visual impairment in all regions of the world, except in the most developed countries. Other major causes of visual impairment are, in order of importance, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and trachoma.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of fenofibrate on the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised controlled trial.

            Laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy is often associated with visual field reduction and other ocular side-effects. Our aim was to assess whether long-term lipid-lowering therapy with fenofibrate could reduce the progression of retinopathy and the need for laser treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study was a multinational randomised trial of 9795 patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive fenofibrate 200 mg/day (n=4895) or matching placebo (n=4900). At each clinic visit, information concerning laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy-a prespecified tertiary endpoint of the main study-was gathered. Adjudication by ophthalmologists masked to treatment allocation defined instances of laser treatment for macular oedema, proliferative retinopathy, or other eye conditions. In a substudy of 1012 patients, standardised retinal photography was done and photographs graded with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) criteria to determine the cumulative incidence of diabetic retinopathy and its component lesions. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN64783481. Laser treatment was needed more frequently in participants with poorer glycaemic or blood pressure control than in those with good control of these factors, and in those with a greater burden of clinical microvascular disease, but the need for such treatment was not affected by plasma lipid concentrations. The requirement for first laser treatment for all retinopathy was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (164 [3.4%] patients on fenofibrate vs 238 [4.9%] on placebo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.84; p=0.0002; absolute risk reduction 1.5% [0.7-2.3]). In the ophthalmology substudy, the primary endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade did not differ significantly between the two groups overall (46 [9.6%] patients on fenofibrate vs 57 [12.3%] on placebo; p=0.19) or in the subset of patients without pre-existing retinopathy (43 [11.4%] vs 43 [11.7%]; p=0.87). By contrast, in patients with pre-existing retinopathy, significantly fewer patients on fenofibrate had a 2-step progression than did those on placebo (three [3.1%] patients vs 14 [14.6%]; p=0.004). An exploratory composite endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade, macular oedema, or laser treatments was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; p=0.022). Treatment with fenofibrate in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus reduces the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy, although the mechanism of this effect does not seem to be related to plasma concentrations of lipids.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Visual acuity measurements.

              C Holladay (2004)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2011
                4 February 2011
                : 11
                : 80
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]University Eye Clinic, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                Article
                1471-2458-11-80
                10.1186/1471-2458-11-80
                3045948
                21294871
                34a70838-1214-49cb-81ed-4618cbaa4177
                Copyright ©2011 de Fine Olivarius et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 19 August 2010
                : 4 February 2011
                Categories
                Research Article

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article