RESUMO

Cervical cancer mortality is high among Peruvian women of reproductive age. Understanding barriers and facilitators of cervical cancer screening and treatment could facilitate development of contextually-relevant interventions to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality. From April to October 2019, we conducted a cross-sectional survey with 22 medical personnel and administrative staff from Liga Contra el Cancer, in Lima, Peru. The survey included structured and open-ended questions about participants' roles in cervical cancer prevention and treatment, perceptions of women's barriers and facilitators for getting screened and/or treated for cervical cancer, as well as attitudes towards adopting new cervical cancer interventions. For structured questions, the frequency of responses for each question was calculated. For responses to open-ended questions, content analysis was used to summarize common themes. Our data suggest that the relative importance and nature of barriers that Peruvian women face are different for cervical cancer screening compared to treatment. In particular, participants mentioned financial concerns as the primary barrier to treatment and a lack of knowledge or awareness of human papillomavirus and/or cervical cancer as the primary barrier to screening uptake among women. Participants reported high willingness to adopt new interventions or strategies related to cervical cancer. Building greater awareness about benefits of cervical cancer screening among women, and reducing financial and geographic barriers to treatment may help improve screening rates, decrease late-stage diagnosis and reduce mortality in women who have a pre-cancer diagnosis, respectively. Further studies are needed to generalize study findings to settings other than Lima, Peru.

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a smartphone-based application's (Peek Acuity) ability to assess visual acuity and screen for ocular conditions in children, we compared visual acuity assessment between Peek Acuity and the pediatric ophthalmology examination and evaluated Peek Acuity's ability to identify children with referable ocular conditions. STUDY DESIGN: We prospectively recruited 111 children age 3-17 years, presenting to a pediatric ophthalmology clinic, who could follow instructions. Monocular visual acuity assessments by Peek Acuity and standard clinical methods were performed in randomized order. We compared visual acuity assessments between methods using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and evaluated Peek Acuity's ability to identify children with referable ocular conditions. RESULTS: ICC comparing visual acuity assessed between methods was 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.92) for first and 0.85 (95% CI 0.78-0.89) for second eyes examined. ICC among 3 to 5-year-olds (preschool-age children) was 0.88 (95% CI 0.77-0.94) for first and 0.45 (95% CI 0.13-0.68) for second eyes examined. Peek Acuity had a sensitivity of 83%-86% for decreased vision and 69%-83% for referable ocular disease. Sensitivity was highest among 3 to 5-year-olds with decreased vision, 93%-100%. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, Peek Acuity visual acuity assessment correlated well with visual acuity assessed by standard clinical methods, though preschool-age children appeared more susceptible to examination fatigue. Peek Acuity performed adequately as a screening tool and had the greatest sensitivity among those with decreased vision and preschool-age children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03212222.

Assuntos

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of segmentation error correction and precision of standardized grading of time domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans obtained during an interventional study for macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). METHODS: A reading center team of two readers and a senior reader evaluated 1199 OCT scans. Manual segmentation error correction (SEC) was performed. The frequency of SEC, resulting change in central retinal thickness after SEC, and reproducibility of SEC were quantified. Optical coherence tomography characteristics associated with the need for SECs were determined. Reading center teams graded all scans, and the reproducibility of this evaluation for scan quality at the fovea and cystoid macular edema was determined on 97 scans. RESULTS: Segmentation errors were observed in 360 (30.0%) scans, of which 312 were interpretable. On these 312 scans, the mean machine-generated central subfield thickness (CST) was 507.4 ± 208.5 µm compared to 583.0 ± 266.2 µm after SEC. Segmentation error correction resulted in a mean absolute CST correction of 81.3 ± 162.0 µm from baseline uncorrected CST. Segmentation error correction was highly reproducible (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.99-1.00). Epiretinal membrane (odds ratio [OR] = 2.3, P < 0.0001), subretinal fluid (OR = 2.1, P = 0.0005), and increasing CST (OR = 1.6 per 100-µm increase, P < 0.001) were associated with need for SEC. Reading center teams reproducibly graded scan quality at the fovea (87% agreement, kappa = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.82) and cystoid macular edema (92% agreement, kappa = 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Optical coherence tomography images obtained during an interventional CRVO treatment trial can be reproducibly graded. Segmentation errors can cause clinically meaningful deviation in central retinal thickness measurements; however, these errors can be corrected reproducibly in a reading center setting. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Segmentation errors are common on these images, can cause clinically meaningful errors in central retinal thickness measurement, and can be corrected reproducibly in a reading center setting.

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for proliferatative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) in eyes with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment but no previous vitreoretinal surgery. DESIGN: Observational case series. METHODS: Prospective study. SETTING: A private vitreoretinal clinic in Caracas, Venezuela. STUDY POPULATION: 119 eyes of 119 patients who presented with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment but no previous vitreoretinal surgery between 1995 and 1998. OBSERVATION PROCEDURES: Data from detailed preoperative and postoperative examinations of each eye were recorded prospectively and entered into an electronic database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of PVR of any type and severe PVR, preoperative risk factors for PVR of any type and severe PVR, effect of PVR and retinal detachment duration on initial and final visual acuity, and surgical complexity. RESULTS: The prevalence of PVR of any type was 52.9% and of severe PVR was 26.9%. The mean retinal detachment duration (+/-SD) was 58.4 (+/-129.1) days, and the mean time from initial examination to surgical treatment (+/-SD) was 24.3 (81.2) days. By univariable analysis, long retinal detachment duration, poor initial visual acuity, and large retinal detachment extent were significantly associated with PVR prevalence and severity. The presence of vitreous hemorrhage was significantly associated with PVR prevalence, and cataract was significantly associated with PVR severity. By multivariable analysis, long retinal detachment duration and large retinal detachment extent were simultaneous risk factors for PVR prevalence, while long retinal detachment, large retinal detachment extent, and poor initial visual acuity were simultaneous risk factors for PVR severity. Eyes with longer retinal detachment duration, PVR of any type, and severe PVR had worse initial and final visual acuities than eyes with shorter retinal detachment duration or those without PVR, respectively. Eyes with PVR had more complex surgery than those without PVR. CONCLUSIONS: PVR occurred very frequently in this population and was associated with more complex surgery and worse visual outcomes than among eyes without PVR. We have identified preventable risk factors associated with PVR that suggest a specific and significant need for better access to ophthalmologic care and patient education in this group of patients.

Assuntos