Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Barriers and enablers to diabetic eye screening: a cross sectional survey of young adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK

View ORCID ProfileLouise Prothero, View ORCID ProfileMartin Cartwright, View ORCID ProfileFabiana Lorencatto, View ORCID ProfileJennifer M Burr, View ORCID ProfileJohn Anderson, Philip Gardner, View ORCID ProfileJustin Presseau, View ORCID ProfileNoah Ivers, View ORCID ProfileJeremy M Grimshaw, View ORCID ProfileJohn G Lawrenson, the EROS Study Investigators
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.24.22275352
Louise Prothero
1School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Louise Prothero
Martin Cartwright
1School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Martin Cartwright
Fabiana Lorencatto
2Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Fabiana Lorencatto
Jennifer M Burr
3School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jennifer M Burr
John Anderson
4Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for John Anderson
Philip Gardner
5Department of Health and Social Care, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Justin Presseau
6Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa Canada
7School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Justin Presseau
Noah Ivers
8Women’s College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Noah Ivers
Jeremy M Grimshaw
5Department of Health and Social Care, London, UK
9Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jeremy M Grimshaw
John G Lawrenson
1School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for John G Lawrenson
  • For correspondence: j.g.lawrenson{at}city.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Introduction Diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) attendance in young adults is consistently below recommended levels. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and enablers of diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) attendance amongst young adults (YA) in the UK living with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes.

Research design and methods YAs (18-34yrs) were invited to complete an anonymous online survey in June 2021 assessing agreement with 30 belief statements informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change (TDF) describing potential barriers/enablers to DRS.

Results In total 102 responses were received. Most had T1D (65.7%) and were regular attenders for DRS (76.5%). The most salient TDF domains for DRS attendance were ‘Goals’, with 93% agreeing that DRS was a high priority and ‘Knowledge’, with 98% being aware that screening can detect eye problems early.

Overall 67.4% indicated that they would like greater appointment flexibility [Environmental context/resources] and 31.3% reported difficulties getting time off work/study to attend appointments [Environmental Context/Resources]. This was more commonly reported by occasional non-attenders versus regular attenders (59.1% vs 23.4%, P=0.002) Most YAs were worried about diabetic retinopathy (74.3%), anxious when receiving screening results (63%) [Emotion] and would like more support after getting their results (66%) [Social influences]. Responses for T1D and T2D were broadly similar, although those with T2D were more likely have developed strategies to help them to remember their appointments (63.6% vs 37.9%, P=0.019) [Behavioural regulation].

Conclusions Attendance for DRS in YAs is influenced by complex interacting behavioural factors. Identifying modifiable determinants of behaviour will provide a basis for designing tailored interventions to improve DRS in YAs and prevent avoidable vision loss.

What is already known about this subject?

  • Younger adults (<35 years) with diabetes have been identified as having longer time intervals before attending initial diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) and are more likely to miss successive screening appointments.

  • Previous studies have explored modifiable influences on DRS attendance, but often do not differentiate between population groups, particularly young adults.

What are the new findings?

  • One of the main reported barriers to attending DRS was the lack of appointment flexibility and difficulty getting time off work/study to attend appointments. This was compounded by the lack of integration of DRS with other diabetes appointments.

  • Most young adults were worried about diabetic retinopathy, anxious when receiving screening results and would like more support

How might these results change the focus of research or clinical practice?

  • A more tailored approach is needed to support young adults to attend DRS. The findings of this research provide a basis for developing tailored interventions to increase screening uptake in this age group

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This report is independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (Policy Research Programme, Enabling diabetic RetinOpathy Screening: Mixed methods study of barriers and enablers to attendance (EROS study), PR-R20-0318-22001). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study received ethical approval from the NHS Wales Research Ethics Committee 2 (REC reference: 19/WA/0228). Prior informed consent was obtained from all participants.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None

  • Funder: This report is independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (Policy Research Programme, Enabling diabetic RetinOpathy Screening: Mixed methods study of barriers and enablers to attendance (EROS study), PR-R20-0318-22001). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Data Availability

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 24, 2022.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Barriers and enablers to diabetic eye screening: a cross sectional survey of young adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Barriers and enablers to diabetic eye screening: a cross sectional survey of young adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK
Louise Prothero, Martin Cartwright, Fabiana Lorencatto, Jennifer M Burr, John Anderson, Philip Gardner, Justin Presseau, Noah Ivers, Jeremy M Grimshaw, John G Lawrenson, the EROS Study Investigators
medRxiv 2022.05.24.22275352; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.24.22275352
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Barriers and enablers to diabetic eye screening: a cross sectional survey of young adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK
Louise Prothero, Martin Cartwright, Fabiana Lorencatto, Jennifer M Burr, John Anderson, Philip Gardner, Justin Presseau, Noah Ivers, Jeremy M Grimshaw, John G Lawrenson, the EROS Study Investigators
medRxiv 2022.05.24.22275352; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.24.22275352

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Ophthalmology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)