Divergent Perceptions of Barriers to Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Among Patients and Care Providers, Los Angeles, California, 2014–2015
ORIGINAL RESEARCH — Volume 13 — October 6, 2016
PEER REVIEWED
Figure 1. Perceived logistic and external barriers to diabetic retinopathy screening, Los Angeles, California, 2014–2015. Patients were asked to rate reasons that “would delay or prevent you from getting your screening/test for diabetic eye disease.” Health care providers and their staffers were asked to rate “how important it is to address the following potential barriers for patients to receive retinal eye screening” at the clinic. All P < .001. Barriers are ordered in descending order by how frequently they were identified by patients.
| Choice Option | Patient Perception, % | Provider/Staff Perception, % |
|---|---|---|
| Financial problems | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 52.5% | Not at all important, 10.8% |
| 2 | Disagree, 14.9% | Slightly important, 5.4% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 6.9% | Moderately important, 8.1% |
| 4 | Agree, 15.8% | Very important, 35.1% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 9.9% | Extremely important, 40.5% |
| Lack of time | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 63.0% | Not at all important, 0.0% |
| 2 | Disagree, 16.0% | Slightly important, 0.0% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 6.0% | Moderately important, 11.1% |
| 4 | Agree, 11.0% | Very important, 33.3% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 4.0% | Extremely important, 55.6% |
| Transportation | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 66.3% | Not at all important, 0.0% |
| 2 | Disagree, 14.9% | Slightly important, 5.1% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 4.0% | Moderately important, 10.3% |
| 4 | Agree, 7.9% | Very important, 0.5% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 6.9% | Extremely important, 64.1% |
| Language | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 65.0% | Not at all important, 7.7% |
| 2 | Disagree, 18.0% | Slightly important, 2.6% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 2.0% | Moderately important, 10.3% |
| 4 | Agree, 8.0% | Very important, 8.2% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 7.0% | Extremely important, 51.3% |
Figure 2. Perceived potential internal barriers to diabetic retinopathy screening, Los Angeles, California, 2014–2015. Patients were asked to rate reasons that “would delay or prevent you from getting your screening/test for diabetic eye disease.” Health care providers and their staffers were asked to rate “how important it is to address the following potential barriers for patients to receive retinal eye screening” at the clinic. All P < .001. Barriers are ordered in descending order by how frequently they were identified by patients. Abbreviation: DR, diabetic retinopathy.
| Choice Option | Patient Perception | Provider/Staff Perception |
|---|---|---|
| Depression | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 61.0% | Not at all important, 6.1% |
| 2 | Disagree, 13.0% | Slightly important, 6.1% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 4.0% | Moderately important, 9.1% |
| 4 | Agree, 17.0% | Very important, 27.3% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 5.0% | Extremely important, 51.5% |
| Denial of eye problems | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 74.0% | Not at all important, 2.6% |
| 2 | Disagree, 15.0% | Slightly important, 2.6% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 3.0% | Moderately important, 15.8% |
| 4 | Agree, 7.0% | Very important, 23.7% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 1.0% | Extremely important, 55.3% |
| Fear | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 73.3% | Not at all important, 10.5% |
| 2 | Disagree, 16.8% | Slightly important, 5.3% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 5.0% | Moderately important, 10.5% |
| 4 | Agree, 4.0% | Very important, 23.7% |
| 5 | 1 Strongly agree,.0% | Extremely important, 50.0% |
| Belief that DR screening is harmful | ||
| 1 | Strongly disagree, 76.3% | Not at all important, 9.1% |
| 2 | Disagree, 17.5% | Slightly important, 15.2% |
| 3 | Neither agree or disagree, 2.1% | Moderately important, 9.1% |
| 4 | Agree, 3.1% | Very important, 15.2% |
| 5 | Strongly agree, 1.0% | Extremely important, 51.5% |
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions.