Community visual field screening: Prevalence of follow-up and factors associated with follow-up of participants with abnormal frequency doubling perimetry technology results

Steven L. Mansberger, Lorna (Beth) Edmunds, Chris A. Johnson, Kyle J. Kent, George A. Cioffi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To determine if a community screening with Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry (FDT) results in a high proportion of follow-up with an eye care provider and the factors associated with follow-up. Design:Cross-sectional study. Setting: Telephone survey Methods: We conducted a telephone survey of participants with abnormal results 3-6 months after the community screening. Results: We were able to interview 121 participants (57% of 212 eligible subjects). Sixty-nine percent (83 of 121) of participants visited an eye care provider after the screening. Patients were more likely to attain an eye exam if they were female, older, or had an educational level of high school or more (p <0.05). Of those participants who did not visit an eye care provider, 41% (18/38) did not believe the results of the test, 21% (8/38) reported not having insurance or an eye care provider, 11% (4/38) did not have time for an eye exam, and 11% (4/38) reported not knowing they needed to see an eye care provider. Conclusion: A community screening program with FDT encouraged more than two thirds of participants with abnormal results to seek an eye exam. The most common reason not to attain an eye exam was failing to recognize the importance of an abnormal test result.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)134-140
Number of pages7
JournalOphthalmic Epidemiology
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Visual Field Tests
Visual Fields
Technology
Telephone
Insurance
Cross-Sectional Studies
Interviews

Keywords

  • Frequency doubling technology perimetry
  • Glaucoma
  • Perimetry
  • Screening
  • Utilization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Epidemiology

Cite this

Community visual field screening : Prevalence of follow-up and factors associated with follow-up of participants with abnormal frequency doubling perimetry technology results. / Mansberger, Steven L.; Edmunds, Lorna (Beth); Johnson, Chris A.; Kent, Kyle J.; Cioffi, George A.

In: Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Vol. 14, No. 3, 05.2007, p. 134-140.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{780cd1ab21d148428e8197184dde48e7,
title = "Community visual field screening: Prevalence of follow-up and factors associated with follow-up of participants with abnormal frequency doubling perimetry technology results",
abstract = "Purpose: To determine if a community screening with Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry (FDT) results in a high proportion of follow-up with an eye care provider and the factors associated with follow-up. Design:Cross-sectional study. Setting: Telephone survey Methods: We conducted a telephone survey of participants with abnormal results 3-6 months after the community screening. Results: We were able to interview 121 participants (57{\%} of 212 eligible subjects). Sixty-nine percent (83 of 121) of participants visited an eye care provider after the screening. Patients were more likely to attain an eye exam if they were female, older, or had an educational level of high school or more (p <0.05). Of those participants who did not visit an eye care provider, 41{\%} (18/38) did not believe the results of the test, 21{\%} (8/38) reported not having insurance or an eye care provider, 11{\%} (4/38) did not have time for an eye exam, and 11{\%} (4/38) reported not knowing they needed to see an eye care provider. Conclusion: A community screening program with FDT encouraged more than two thirds of participants with abnormal results to seek an eye exam. The most common reason not to attain an eye exam was failing to recognize the importance of an abnormal test result.",
keywords = "Frequency doubling technology perimetry, Glaucoma, Perimetry, Screening, Utilization",
author = "Mansberger, {Steven L.} and Edmunds, {Lorna (Beth)} and Johnson, {Chris A.} and Kent, {Kyle J.} and Cioffi, {George A.}",
year = "2007",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1080/09286580601174060",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "134--140",
journal = "Ophthalmic Epidemiology",
issn = "0928-6586",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Community visual field screening

T2 - Prevalence of follow-up and factors associated with follow-up of participants with abnormal frequency doubling perimetry technology results

AU - Mansberger, Steven L.

AU - Edmunds, Lorna (Beth)

AU - Johnson, Chris A.

AU - Kent, Kyle J.

AU - Cioffi, George A.

PY - 2007/5

Y1 - 2007/5

N2 - Purpose: To determine if a community screening with Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry (FDT) results in a high proportion of follow-up with an eye care provider and the factors associated with follow-up. Design:Cross-sectional study. Setting: Telephone survey Methods: We conducted a telephone survey of participants with abnormal results 3-6 months after the community screening. Results: We were able to interview 121 participants (57% of 212 eligible subjects). Sixty-nine percent (83 of 121) of participants visited an eye care provider after the screening. Patients were more likely to attain an eye exam if they were female, older, or had an educational level of high school or more (p <0.05). Of those participants who did not visit an eye care provider, 41% (18/38) did not believe the results of the test, 21% (8/38) reported not having insurance or an eye care provider, 11% (4/38) did not have time for an eye exam, and 11% (4/38) reported not knowing they needed to see an eye care provider. Conclusion: A community screening program with FDT encouraged more than two thirds of participants with abnormal results to seek an eye exam. The most common reason not to attain an eye exam was failing to recognize the importance of an abnormal test result.

AB - Purpose: To determine if a community screening with Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry (FDT) results in a high proportion of follow-up with an eye care provider and the factors associated with follow-up. Design:Cross-sectional study. Setting: Telephone survey Methods: We conducted a telephone survey of participants with abnormal results 3-6 months after the community screening. Results: We were able to interview 121 participants (57% of 212 eligible subjects). Sixty-nine percent (83 of 121) of participants visited an eye care provider after the screening. Patients were more likely to attain an eye exam if they were female, older, or had an educational level of high school or more (p <0.05). Of those participants who did not visit an eye care provider, 41% (18/38) did not believe the results of the test, 21% (8/38) reported not having insurance or an eye care provider, 11% (4/38) did not have time for an eye exam, and 11% (4/38) reported not knowing they needed to see an eye care provider. Conclusion: A community screening program with FDT encouraged more than two thirds of participants with abnormal results to seek an eye exam. The most common reason not to attain an eye exam was failing to recognize the importance of an abnormal test result.

KW - Frequency doubling technology perimetry

KW - Glaucoma

KW - Perimetry

KW - Screening

KW - Utilization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34347373458&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34347373458&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/09286580601174060

DO - 10.1080/09286580601174060

M3 - Article

C2 - 17613848

AN - SCOPUS:34347373458

VL - 14

SP - 134

EP - 140

JO - Ophthalmic Epidemiology

JF - Ophthalmic Epidemiology

SN - 0928-6586

IS - 3

ER -