Abstract 105 Table 1

Studies of diabetic retinopathy management in African-Americans

First Author Last Name, Year and LocationTotal Number of Subjects and Mean Age (yrs)Total Number and Percentage of Subjects in each group with Diabetic RetinopathyInterventionOutcome MeasuredFactors Associated with Improved Outcome
Basch 1999, New York N=280, mean age Intervention group=55.6, mean age Control=53.9 All African American, Intervention group n= 137, Control Group (standard of care), n=143 Individualized Education: Videotape, phone counseling Dilated eye exam within 6 months Dilated eye exam f/u in intervention group vs control: 54.7% vs. 27.3% (p<0.05)
Zhang 2009, North Carolina N=1289, age > 18 yrs old All African American, Intervention group n=617, Control n=672 Project *DIRECT 1: Community-wide eye care education focused on diet and physical activity in the intervention community Survey sent to patients with DR in 1997 (baseline) and 2004 (after intervention) to follow-up on annual dilated eye exams and eye education in two communities Dilated eye exam decreased among both groups: intervention group (85.8% to 72.8%); control group (81.6% to 66.1%) but increased among those without DR: intervention group (52.7% to 59.0%); control group (48.7% to 57.7%)
Weiss 2015, Will Eye Hospital in Philadelphia, PA N= 206, mean age Intervention= 72.8, Control group= 72.8 All African American, Intervention/*BADRP group n=103, Control/supportive therapy n=103 *BADRP combines diabetes education, behavioral therapy and health belief model, problem solving skills and formulating an action plan. Medical documentation of diabetic fundus exam within 6 months Dilated exam in Intervention vs. Standard Supportive= 87.9% vs 34.1% (p<0.001).
Davis 2010, South Carolina N=165, mean age= 59.9 74% African American, Intervention group: n=85, Control group: n=80 Diabetes TeleCare intervention: 13 sessions (3 individual and 10 video conferencing) Frequency of eye exams in clinic after telemedicine visit Intervention vs. Control eye exam baseline: 51.2% vs 46.3%. After intervention at 12 months: 81.2% vs. 38.8%, p=0.0001
Aleo 2015, Philadelphia, PA N=83 African American with DR, mean age=54.7 Intervention group (contract)=42, Control group=41 The intervention group consisted of signing a contract for follow-up follow up appointment adherence in participants with DR Intervention vs. Control: 38.1% vs 43.9% (P=0.59)
Anderson 2003, Detroit, MI N=132, mean age= 55.75 All African American after randomization, Intervention/personalized group: n=67, control group/standard: n=65 Intensive personalized follow up plan with phone calls and education Annual follow-up diabetic eye evaluation Intervention vs. Control eye exam baseline: 24.2% vs 26.2%. After intervention, yearly eye visit increased 65.7% vs 35% (P=0.001), odds ratio that return for DEE was due to personal follow up 5.62 (CI=2.13,14.86 P=0.0006)
Walker 2008, Bronx, NY N=598, mean age= 56.6 African American:45%, Hispanic/Latino: 42.5%, Intervention/Phone calls): N=305, Control group (print)=293 Tailored telephone intervention with education and risk communications. Up to 7 phone calls within 6 months was allotted Documentation of a dilated fundus exam within 6 months Intervention vs. Control: 33.8% vs 18.5% (p<0.0005)
  • DIRECT= Diabetes Interventions Reaching and Educating Communities Together BADRP= Behavioral Activation for Diabetic Retinopathy Prevention