Facilitated Versus Self-guided Training of Non-ophthalmologists for Grading Pre-plus and Plus Disease Using Fundus Images for Retinopathy of Prematurity Screening

2016 
Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is an important cause of preventable blindness; barriers to screening necessitate novel approaches. Although trained non-ophthalmologists can accurately grade retinal images for ROP, effective training protocols are not established. This study compares the effectiveness of facilitated versus self-guided training of non-ophthalmologists for grading retinal images for pre-plus or plus disease in ROP.Forty-eight undergraduate and graduate students were trained to grade retinal images for the presence of pre-plus or plus disease. Students were randomly assigned to one of two training protocols. Both used identical electronic slideshows: one was guided by an in-person facilitator and the other was self-guided. After completing their respective training, students proficient in grading pre-plus and plus disease graded images in a telemedicine screening scenario. Accuracy of grading was compared to the reference standard of clinical examination.Eighty-three percent (40 of 48) of trained students (91% in the facilitated vs 77% in the self-guided group, P = .26) were proficient and qualified to grade the ROP telemedicine screening scenario. Median accuracy for grading normal, pre-plus, or plus disease was 69% (70% in the facilitated vs 68% in the self-guided group, P = .91). When considering the designation of pre-plus or plus disease by graders as a screening test for detecting plus disease (confirmed on clinical examination), the median sensitivity and specificity of all students were 95% and 64%, respectively.Both facilitated and self-guided teaching protocols yielded similar performance in ROP image grading for pre-plus or plus disease. Self-guided training protocols may be adequate to train non-ophthalmologists to grade retinal images for pre-plus and plus disease with high sensitivity. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2016;53(3):179-185.].
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    23
    References
    2
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []