Impact of a short online course on the accuracy of non-ophthalmic diabetic retinopathy graders in recognising glaucomatous optic nerves in Vietnam

Abstract

Purpose To test an online training course for non-ophthalmic diabetic retinopathy (DR) graders for recognition of glaucomatous optic nerves in Vietnam.Methods This was an uncontrolled, experimental, before-and-after study in which 43 non-ophthalmic DR graders underwent baseline testing on a standard image set, completed a self-paced, online training course and were retested using the same photographs presented randomly. Twenty-nine local ophthalmologists completed the same test without the training course. DR graders then underwent additional one–to-one training by a glaucoma specialist and were retested. Test performance (% correct, compared with consensus grades from four fellowship-trained glaucoma experts), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating (AUC) curve, were computed.Results Mean age of DR graders (32.6±5.5 years) did not differ from ophthalmologists (32.3±7.3 years, p=0.13). Online training required a mean of 297.9 (SD 144.6) minutes. Graders’ mean baseline score (33.3%±14.3%) improved significantly after training (55.8%±12.6%, p<0.001), and post-training score did not differ from ophthalmologists (58.7±15.4%, p=0.384). Although grader sensitivity reduced before [85.5% (95% CI 83.5% to 87.3%)] versus after [80.4% (78.3% to 82.4%)] training, specificity improved significantly [47.8 (44.9 to 50.7) vs 79.8 (77.3 to 82.0), p<0.001]. Grader AUC also improved after training [66.6 (64.9 to 68.3)] to [80.1 (78.5 to 81.6), p<0.001]. Additional one-to-one grader training by a glaucoma specialist did not further improve grader scores.Conclusion Non-ophthalmic DR graders can be trained to recognise glaucoma using a short online course in this setting, with no additional benefit from more expensive one–to-one training. After 5-hour online training in recognising glaucomatous optic nerve head, scores of non-ophthalmic DR graders doubled, and did not differ from local ophthalmologists. Intensive one-to-one training did not further improve performance