Ophthalmology Science (Dec 2023)

Artificial Intelligence-Human Hybrid Workflow Enhances Teleophthalmology for the Detection of Diabetic Retinopathy

  • Eliot R. Dow, MD, PhD,
  • Nergis C. Khan, BS,
  • Karen M. Chen, BS,
  • Kapil Mishra, MD,
  • Chandrashan Perera, MD,
  • Ramsudha Narala, MD,
  • Marina Basina, MD,
  • Jimmy Dang, BSN,
  • Michael Kim, MD,
  • Marcie Levine, MD,
  • Anuradha Phadke, MD,
  • Marilyn Tan, MD,
  • Kirsti Weng, MD,
  • Diana V. Do, MD,
  • Darius M. Moshfeghi, MD,
  • Vinit B. Mahajan, MD, PhD,
  • Prithvi Mruthyunjaya, MD, MHS,
  • Theodore Leng, MD, MS,
  • David Myung, MD, PhD

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 3, no. 4
p. 100330

Abstract

Read online

Objective: Detection of diabetic retinopathy (DR) outside of specialized eye care settings is an important means of access to vision-preserving health maintenance. Remote interpretation of fundus photographs acquired in a primary care or other nonophthalmic setting in a store-and-forward manner is a predominant paradigm of teleophthalmology screening programs. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based image interpretation offers an alternative means of DR detection. IDx-DR (Digital Diagnostics Inc) is a Food and Drug Administration-authorized autonomous testing device for DR. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of IDx-DR compared with human-based teleophthalmology over 2 and a half years. Additionally, we evaluated an AI-human hybrid workflow that combines AI-system evaluation with human expert-based assessment for referable cases. Design: Prospective cohort study and retrospective analysis. Participants: Diabetic patients ≥ 18 years old without a prior DR diagnosis or DR examination in the past year presenting for routine DR screening in a primary care clinic. Methods: Macula-centered and optic nerve-centered fundus photographs were evaluated by an AI algorithm followed by consensus-based overreading by retina specialists at the Stanford Ophthalmic Reading Center. Detection of more-than-mild diabetic retinopathy (MTMDR) was compared with in-person examination by a retina specialist. Main Outcome Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and gradability achieved by the AI algorithm and retina specialists. Results: The AI algorithm had higher sensitivity (95.5% sensitivity; 95% confidence interval [CI], 86.7%–100%) but lower specificity (60.3% specificity; 95% CI, 47.7%–72.9%) for detection of MTMDR compared with remote image interpretation by retina specialists (69.5% sensitivity; 95% CI, 50.7%–88.3%; 96.9% specificity; 95% CI, 93.5%–100%). Gradability of encounters was also lower for the AI algorithm (62.5%) compared with retina specialists (93.1%). A 2-step AI-human hybrid workflow in which the AI algorithm initially rendered an assessment followed by overread by a retina specialist of MTMDR-positive encounters resulted in a sensitivity of 95.5% (95% CI, 86.7%–100%) and a specificity of 98.2% (95% CI, 94.6%–100%). Similarly, a 2-step overread by retina specialists of AI-ungradable encounters improved gradability from 63.5% to 95.6% of encounters. Conclusions: Implementation of an AI-human hybrid teleophthalmology workflow may both decrease reliance on human specialist effort and improve diagnostic accuracy. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Keywords