Retinopathy of prematurity screening in Johannesburg, South Africa: A comparative study
Background: Timeous screening of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is an important predictor of ROP screening outcomes, and hospitals at different levels of care might have different access to ROP screening by ophthalmologists, resulting in different ROP screening outcomes. Objective: To compare ROP...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
AOSIS
2022-09-01
|
| Series: | African Vision and Eye Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://avehjournal.org/index.php/aveh/article/view/771 |
| Summary: | Background: Timeous screening of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is an important predictor of ROP screening outcomes, and hospitals at different levels of care might have different access to ROP screening by ophthalmologists, resulting in different ROP screening outcomes.
Objective: To compare ROP screening outcomes between premature babies from a neonatal facility at a central hospital to those from regional hospitals in Johannesburg.
Setting: Retinopathy of prematurity screening in babies born at central and non-central hospitals in Johannesburg, South Africa, between 01 January 2015 and 31 June 2020.
Methods: A cross-sectional study describing clinical findings in babies referred for ROP screening at a central Johannesburg hospital.
Results: A total of 2035 ROP screening records were included in the study. The babies screened from the central hospital and regional hospitals were 1081 (53.1%) and 954 (46.9%), respectively. The proportion of babies with ROP were 125 (11.6%) and 121 (12.7%) in the central hospital and regional hospitals, respectively, and this difference was not statistically significant, p = 0.435. There was a significant association between gestational age (GA) categories and birth weight (BW) with the hospital of birth, with proportionately more babies with GA 28 weeks, 212 (19.6%) versus 158 (16.6%) p 0.001, and BW 1500 g, 894 (82.7%) versus 737 (77.3%) p = 0.001, being referred by the central hospital compared to regional hospitals.
Conclusion: The prevalence of ROP in regional hospitals does not seem to differ from that found in central hospitals. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2413-3183 2410-1516 |