Published online August 31, 2007
PEDIATRICS Vol. 120 No. 3 September 2007, pp. 527-531 (doi:10.1542/peds.2007-0378)
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kemper, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Wallace, D. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kemper, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Wallace, D. K.
Related Collections
Right arrow Premature & Newborn
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

ARTICLE

Neonatologists' Practices and Experiences in Arranging Retinopathy of Prematurity Screening Services

Alex R. Kemper, MD, MPH, MSa,b and David K. Wallace, MD, MPHb,c

a Program on Pediatric Health Services Research
b Departments of Pediatrics
c Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

BACKGROUND. Neonatologists play a central role in identifying infants who require screening for retinopathy of prematurity and in coordinating screening and treatment when necessary. No previous study has evaluated neonatologists' practices or experiences related to these activities.

METHODS. A national mail survey of a random sample of 300 neonatologists was conducted from September to November 2006.

RESULTS. The response rate was 62%. Nearly all (98%) of the respondents considered gestational age to identify infants for retinopathy of prematurity screening. However, only 19% used the currently recommended gestational age criterion of 30 weeks; instead, 6% used a lower, more-restrictive criterion, and 74% used a higher, more-inclusive criterion. Fewer respondents (77%) considered birth weight to identify infants for retinopathy of prematurity screening, most of whom (86%) used the current criterion of ≤1500 g. Although more than one half (67%) of the respondents reported that pediatric ophthalmologists usually screen infants for retinopathy of prematurity in their NICU, nearly one half (46%) reported that retinal specialists provide treatment. Some (36%) reported that they have been unable to transfer a child to a NICU of lower acuity or closer to the child's home because there are no specialists available there for retinopathy of prematurity screening. Some (34%) also reported that they have needed to delay discharge because outpatient follow-up for either screening or treatment of retinopathy of prematurity is not available near the family's home.

CONCLUSIONS. We found variations in how children are identified for retinopathy of prematurity screening and how screening and treatment are provided. Future research is needed to understand how these variations affect visual outcomes and costs of care. Such work must also consider the impact of regional pediatric eye care workforce shortages on retinopathy of prematurity screening and treatment strategies.

Key Words: retinopathy of prematurity • guideline adherence • ophthalmology • neonatology • health manpower • practice patterns

Abbreviations: ROP—retinopathy of prematurity

Accepted Apr 11, 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch OphthalmolHome page
S. Day, A. M. Menke, and R. L. Abbott
Retinopathy of Prematurity Malpractice Claims: The Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company Experience
Arch Ophthalmol, June 1, 2009; 127(6): 794 - 798.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch OphthalmolHome page
M. D. Mills
Retinopathy of Prematurity Malpractice Claims
Arch Ophthalmol, June 1, 2009; 127(6): 803 - 804.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
A. Hellstrom, A.-L. Hard, E. Engstrom, A. Niklasson, E. Andersson, L. Smith, and C. Lofqvist
Early Weight Gain Predicts Retinopathy in Preterm Infants: New, Simple, Efficient Approach to Screening
Pediatrics, April 1, 2009; 123(4): e638 - e645.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J OphthalmolHome page
C Dhaliwal, E Wright, C Graham, N McIntosh, and B W Fleck
Wide-field digital retinal imaging versus binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity screening: a two-observer prospective, randomised comparison
Br J Ophthalmol, March 1, 2009; 93(3): 355 - 359.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
A. R. Kemper, D. K. Wallace, and G. E. Quinn
Systematic Review of Digital Imaging Screening Strategies for Retinopathy of Prematurity
Pediatrics, October 1, 2008; 122(4): 825 - 830.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]