Fact checked byHeather Biele

Read more

November 15, 2023
2 min read
Save

Extending diabetic retinopathy screening intervals may be safe for low-risk individuals

Fact checked byHeather Biele
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Key takeaways:

  • Longer screening intervals of 3 to 5 years may be acceptable in certain circumstances, including those with type 2 diabetes and no current DR.
  • Extending these intervals may reduce health care costs and workload.
Perspective from Julie Rodman, OD, MS, FAAO

Longer diabetic retinopathy screening intervals of 3 to 5 years may be safe under certain circumstances and may reduce health care costs and workload, according to a systematic review published in Acta Ophthalmologica.

“This review summarizes the contemporary evidence on [diabetic retinopathy (DR)] screening intervals, which suggests that extending DR screening beyond two-yearly intervals in certain circumstances, such as in those with no current DR, is associated with a low risk of developing [sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy] or requiring treatment,” Jocelyn J. Drinkwater, PhD, of the University of Western Australia and Lions Eye Institute, and colleagues wrote.

Eye doctor discussing
According to researchers, extending diabetic retinopathy screening intervals for those at low risk or using a personalized risk assessment may reduce health care costs and workload. Image: Adobe Stock.

Seeking to determine whether annual screening intervals could be lengthened without progression to vison loss, Drinkwater and colleagues reviewed studies that evaluated specific DR screening intervals, identified optimal intervals and examined personalized DR risk assessment.

Researchers identified 23 studies, eight of which were included. Of four studies that assessed specific screening intervals, results suggested a low risk for developing treatable DR within 3 to 4 years for people with type 2 diabetes and no current DR.

After reviewing studies on optimal screening intervals, researchers found that screening intervals of 2 to 3 years appeared safe for individuals without DR but also determined that intervals could safely be extended when other clinical parameters were under control.

Lastly, when evaluating studies on DR risk equations, including RetinaRisk and the Liverpool Risk Calculation Engine, researchers reported that screening intervals could be extended up to 5 years for individuals at lower risk for DR progression, while those at higher risk for progression to sight-threatening DR required more frequent screening.

Taken together, the studies suggested that longer screening intervals of 3 to 5 years appeared safe in certain circumstances, such as patients with type 2 diabetes and no current DR, and patients who had optimal management of other risk factors, like HbA1c and blood pressure.

“Extending DR intervals for those at low risk or using a personalized DR risk assessment has been shown to reduce health care costs and workload, reducing pressure on health services,” Drinkwater and colleagues wrote. “Health departments should consider extending DR screening intervals for those with no current DR and type 2 diabetes, or using a personalized DR risk assessment to improve the efficiency of DR screening and reduce health service costs while maintaining safe outcomes.”

They continued, “Furthermore, for those with current DR, more frequent screening may be appropriate.”