Diabetic retinopathy (DR) in pregnancy can cause blindness. National guidelines recommend at least one eye examination in early pregnancy, then ideally 3-monthly, through to the postpartum for pregnant women with pregestational diabetes. Here we examined adherence rates, barriers and enablers to recommended DR screening guidelines.

Cross-sectional survey study, as part of a larger prospective cohort study.

Participants were recruited from two tertiary maternity hospitals in Melbourne, Australia.

Of the 173 pregnant women with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the main cohort study, with an additional four who participated solely in this survey study, 130 (74.3%) completed the survey.

This study calculated rates of adherence to guideline-recommended DR screening schedules and collected data on the enablers and barriers to attendance using a modified Compliance with Annual Diabetic Eye Exams Survey. Each of the 5-point Likert-scale survey items was compared between adherent and non-adherent participants using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and logistic regression models were constructed to quantify associations as ORs.

A retinal assessment was undertaken at least once during pregnancy in 86.3% of participants, but only 40.9% attended during their first trimester and only 21.2% attended the recommended number of examinations. Competing priorities were the main barriers to adherence, with eye examinations ranked as the fourth priority (IQR 4th–5th) among other health appointments during pregnancy. Meanwhile, knowledge of the benefits of eye screening examinations, eye-check reminders and support from relatives was identified as enablers.

Despite the risk of worsening DR during pregnancy, less than half of the participants adhered to recommended screening guidelines, suggesting that eye health is not a priority. Proactive measures to integrate care are needed to prevent visual loss in this growing population.

The objective of this study was to understand primary care clinician perspectives on a novel linked health data system to facilitate diabetes prevention for individuals with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We used the conceptual example of linking the National Gestational Diabetes Register with primary care electronic health records to understand clinicians’ views on potential implementation.

A qualitative study of semistructured interviews with primary care clinicians.

Australian primary care.

Primary care clinicians (n=14). Inclusion criteria were: general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses and/or diabetes educators working in primary care in Australia, and seeing individuals with a history of GDM; aged 18 years and over; and willing to voluntarily contribute to the project. There were no exclusion criteria.

Clinicians’ views on acceptability, feasibility and utility were characterised by realistic optimism for a linked data system to improve GP workflow and patient outcomes. Clinicians noted existing pressures on primary care and patient concerns regarding confidentiality and privacy, and that these factors should be considered in the development process. Clinicians envisaged three functions for their clinical management systems: (1) automatically updating a patient’s past history; (2) generating actionable alerts and (3) generating recall lists.

Primary care clinicians were unanimously supportive of a linked health data system to facilitate diabetes prevention. Consistent with previous studies, we identified the key clinician-related enabler as the integration into existing GP workflows to facilitate pro-active clinical care. Point-of-care tools and preventative care consultations could increase the uptake of screening and provide opportunities for patient education post partum.

In combination with effective prevention programmes, and health policy and system supports, linked health data systems could be part of the equation for type 2 diabetes prevention for individuals with a history of GDM. Larger acceptability, feasibility, co-design and implementation studies are recommended.

We calculate positive predictive values (PPVs) of patients presenting with unexpected weight loss (UWL) being diagnosed with cancer within 6 months, using data from a population of Australian primary care patients to replicate results from a previous UK study.

A diagnostic accuracy study involving calculation of the PPV for any cancer using retrospective data from routinely collected electronic healthcare records. The index date is defined as the first recorded UWL presentation and the reference standard is cancer diagnosis within 6 months of the index date.

This study uses primary care data from the Patron primary care database, linked to hospital admissions data and the Victorian Cancer Registry. We include only patients who presented to their General Practitioners (GPs) at least once between 1 July 2007 and 1 February 2022.

Patients were included if they were at least 18 years of age at the index date, had no previous diagnosis of cancer or previous weight loss intervention, including being prescribed medications for weight loss. 13 306 patients out of a primary care population of 1 791 051 patients were identified that met the eligibility criteria.

When stratified by age, sex and smoking status, we found PPVs lower than those derived in a previous UK primary care study, though still above 3% for male non-smokers over 60, female smokers over 70 and all males over 70. Patients from ages 60–79 with at least one abnormal blood test result had PPVs consistently above 3%, while overall, patients with abnormal blood test results have PPVs of up to 35%.

We confirmed that many PPVs, while consistently below those derived in the UK study, are above clinically significant thresholds and increasing with age and the number of different abnormal blood test results.