From postgraduate student to published writer:discourse variation and development in TESOL

This thesis is part of a project whose overall aim is to assist participants on an MSc TESOL course who wish to begin to publish articles in the field to do so. The project, which is undertaken within a naturalistic paradigm, has two intimately related and mutually constitutive strands: one descriptive, one interventionist. The descriptive strand consists of an analytical model of the TESOL article genre, and it is instantiated in this thesis. The interventionist strand consists of a series of pedagogic interactions and materials intended to assist project participants formulate a text suitable for publication within the target genre, and it is reported on in this thesis. I begin the thesis by looking in detail at the research approach which characterises the project. I then attempt to explain the situational context of the work and to position it within the context of other research in the areas of discourse community membership, academic genres, genre learning and academic enculturation. Having thus contextualised the work, I next attempt a detailed exploration of the problems of postgraduate students in TESOL when first attempting to write in the TESOL article genre: this exploration is undertaken from both a linguistic and a pedagogic perspective. Then in subsequent chapters, both a linguistic and a pedagogic response to these problems are proposed: the first consisting of an analytical model of the target genre, the second consisting of a series of pedagogic interactions and materials. The relationships between the two lines of response are also examined in some detail. Then in the final part of the thesis, I report feedback from the interventionist strand and attempt to conduct an evaluation of the whole project to date. Criteria for evaluation are proposed and examined in some detail in the context of the research approach of the project. The concluding chapter is a brief discussion of future directions for this work.

How accurate are photographic surrogate markers used to detect macular oedema in the english national Screening Programme?

Introduction: Macular oedema is not directly visible on digital photographs used in screening. Photographic surrogate markers are used to detect patients who may have macular oedema. Evidence suggests that only around 10% of patients with these surrogate markers referred to an ophthalmologist have macular oedema when examined by slit-lamp biomicroscopy. Purpose: The purpose of this audit was to determine how many patients with surrogate markers were truly identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT) as having macular oedema. Method: Data were collected from patients attending digital diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients who presented with surrogate markers for macular oedema also had an OCT scan. The fast macula scan on the Stratus OCT was used and an ophthalmologist reviewed the scans to determine whether macular oedema was present. Results: Out of 66 patients with maculopathy defined as haemorrhages or microaneurysms within one optic disc diameter (DD) of the fovea and visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/9 11 (17%) showed thickening on the OCT, only 4 (6%) had macular oedema. None required laser. Out of 155 patients with maculopathy defined as any exudate within one DD of the fovea or circinate within two DD 45 (29%) showed thickening on the OCT of these 27% required laser. Conclusion: OCT is a useful tool in screening to help identify those who need a true referral to ophthalmology for maculopathy. If exudate is present the chance of having macular oedema and requiring laser treatment is greater than the presence of microaneurysms within one DD and reduced VA.

Evaluating digital diabetic retinopathy screening in people aged 90 years and over

Introduction: The English National Screening Programme determines that all people with diabetes aged 12 and over should be screened annually for diabetic retinopathy (DR) until they die. Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate digital DR screening in patients aged 90 and over to establish whether it is appropriate to cease screening at age 90. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 200 randomly selected patients with diabetes aged 90 and over within the Birmingham and Black Country Screening Programme. Results: 179 (90%) patients attended screening at least once after turning 90 years of age. To date, the mean number of screens per person 90+ was two (range 1–6) and the mean age of the first of these screens was 91 years (range 90–98 years). 133 (74%) were put on annual recall after their first screen in their 90’s, of which 58% had no visible DR bilaterally. 38 (21%) were referred to ophthalmology - 35 (92%) for non-DR reasons and three for maculopathy. Of the 133 patients put on annual recall, 75 (56%) were screened at least once more. Seven improved, 36 remained stable, three became unsuitable and 29 deteriorated. Of the latter, 18 patients were referred to ophthalmology; one of these for DR. Conclusion: Patients with diabetes aged 90 and over are at low risk of sight threatening DR and annual screening in this age group may be unnecessary. However, annual screening does provide opportunistic identification.

Is twelve years old an acceptable age at which to begin Diabetic Retinopathy Screening?

Introduction: The English National Screening Programme for diabetic retinopathy (ENSPDR) states that “all people with diabetes aged 12 years and over should be offered screening” Purpose: The audit aims to assess whether the current guideline is suitable and whether diabetes duration should be taken into account when deciding at what age to start screening patients. Method: Retrospective analysis of 143 randomly selected patients aged twelve years or younger who have attended diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in the Birmingham and Black Country Screening Programme. Results: 98% had Type 1 diabetes and mean visual acuity (VA) was 6/5 (6/4-6/36). 73 were under 12 with 7 the youngest age and 70 were aged 12. Both groups had mean diabetes duration of 5 years (1month-11years). For those under 12, 7/73 (9.6%) had background DR, of these mean diabetes duration was 7 years (6-8) and the youngest aged 8. In those aged 12, 5/70 (7.1%) had background DR; of these mean diabetes duration was 8 years (6-11). In total 12 (8.4%) patients aged 12 years or under developed DR. No patients had retinopathy worse than background changes. One patient was referred to ophthalmology for VAs of 6/12, 6/18 and was diagnosed with optic atrophy so returned to annual screening. Conclusion: The results suggest that the current guideline on when to begin screening should be readdressed as more patients under twelve developed DR than those aged 12. Diabetes duration may help when deciding what age to start screening adolescent patients as DR was not seen in those with disease duration.

Optic disc haemorrhage audit

Poster section INTRODUCTION. Retrospective Analysis PURPOSE. To evaluate the morphology and location of optic disc haemorrhages (ODH) identified at diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening to establish whether particular ODH are predictive of ocular disease (e.g. glaucoma). METHODS. Retrospective analysis of 77 patients who presented with ODH at DR screening in the Birmingham and Black Country screening programme between June 2009-March 2010. Mean age was 71 years (range 39-89). Cup/disc ratio (CDR), location and morphology of the haemorrhage were recorded. The outcome of the referral and the status of the ODH were followed up a year later. RESULTS. Of the 77 referred, 34 patients were unassessed for possible glaucoma. Of the 43 patients that were assessed in the hospital eye service for glaucoma, 11 (26%) were diagnosed with glaucoma. These glaucoma patients mostly presented with flame haemorrhages (64%) and blot haemorrhages (36%). Haemorrhages tended to adjoin the margin of the OD (64%), and were more commonly flame shaped (64%). They less commonly occurred in the optic disc itself (36%), and were all blot shaped. The OD Cup/disc ratio (CDR) of the patients with glaucoma (n=11) ranged from 0.33-0.57. It is interesting to note the highest CDR was 0.68 in the 77 patients referred. 32 patients were confirmed as not having glaucoma. 24 (75%) of these patients presented with an ODH adjoining the margin, of which 20 (83%) were flame, and 4 blot (17%) shaped. Only 8 (25%) presented with an ODH in the OD, of which 6 (75%) were blot shaped. One year follow up of the 77 referred cases revealed that the ODH resolved in 45 (57%) patients while 10 (13%) still had an ODH present. 15 (21%) were still under ophthalmology hence digital retinal photos were not available for assessment. Six patients (8%) (age range 71-91 years) died within the year, and one lost to follow up. CONCLUSIONS. The results suggest that a significant number of patients with ODH have glaucoma and that the differing morphology of the haemorrhage is not a major predictor i.e. blot versus flame shaped, adjoining or in the optic disc. The cup/disc ratio did not predict glaucoma either.

Retinal thickness in pregnant women with diabetes

Poster section Design. Retrospective study. Purpose. To assess whether there are changes in foveal thickness (FT) and total macular volume (TMV) in pregnancy in diabetic subjects. Methods. The audit consisted of pregnant women with diabetes, with no maculopathy, who completed their antenatal care at Birmingham Heartlands Hospital. The Zeiss Stratus Optical coherence tomography (OCT) was performed on patients attending diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening at intervals throughout their pregnancy. To be included in the audit patients had to have at least one OCT scan during their pregnancy. Results. Altogether there were 8 type 1 and 22 type 2 patients with mean diabetes duration of 6 years (range 1-20). Mean gestation at DR screening with OCT during the first trimester was 9.7 weeks (6-13) (n=22). The mean and standard deviation for FT for the right was 179.1 µm ± 21.49 and for the left eye was 187.3 µm ± 23.55. The mean TMV was right 6.43 µm ± 0.35 and left 6.50 µm ± 0.39. The mean gestation at DR screening with OCT during the second trimester was 23.4 weeks (18-26) (n=25). The mean FT for the right was 191.4 µm ± 22.70 and the left 195.6 µm ± 24.77. The mean TMV was right 6.74 µm ± 0.45 and left 6.91 µm ± 0.35. The gestation of DR screening with OCT during the third trimester was 31.1 weeks (27-36) (n=15). The mean FT for the right was 181.5 µm ± 24.84 and for the left 193.1 µm ± 28.55. The mean TMV was right 6.80 µm ± 0.40 and left 6.84 µm ± 0.31. There were no significant differences in FT over the 3 trimesters. The TMV showed a significant difference when comparing the first and second trimesters (p<0.05). However, there was no significant statistical difference in TMV in the second and third trimesters. None of the patients showed any macula edema on the OCT. Conclusions. The results suggest there is no significant change in foveal thickness in pregnancy in diabetic subjects. There was a significant statistical difference in total macular volume in the second trimester; however, this would not be clinically significant. This is an important observation proven by the OCT which has not been previously studied.

What is the prevalence of diabetic macular oedema involving the centre of the macula in patients undergoing digital diabetic retinopathy screening

Free Paper Sessions Design. Retrospective analysis. Purpose. To assess the prevalence of center-involving diabetic macular oedema (CIDMO) and risk factors. Methods. Retrospective review of patients who were screen positive for maculopathy (M1) during 2010 in East and North Birmingham. The CIDMO was diagnosed by qualitative identification of definite foveal oedema on optical coherence tomography (OCT). Results. Out of a total of 15,234 patients screened, 1194 (7.8%) were screen positive for M1 (64% bilateral). A total of 137 (11.5% of M1s) were diagnosed with macular oedema after clinical assessment. The OCT results were available for 123/137; 69 (56.1%) of these had CI-DMO (30 bilateral) which is 0.5% of total screens and 5.8% of those screen positive for M1. In those with CIDMO 60.9% were male and 63.8% Caucasian; 90% had type 2 diabetes and mean diabetes duration was 20 years (SD 9.7, range 2-48). Mean HbA1c was 8.34%±1.69, with 25% having an HbA1c =9%. Furthermore, 62% were on insulin, 67% were on antihypertensive therapy, and 64% were on a cholesterol-lowering drug. A total of 37.7% had an eGFR between 30% and 60% and 5.8% had eGFR <30. The only significant difference between the CIDMO and non-CIDMO group was mean age (67.83±12.26 vs 59.69±15.82; p=0.002). A total of 65.2% of those with CIDMO also had proliferative or preproliferative retinopathy in the worst eye and 68.1% had subsequently been treated with macular laser at the time of data review. Conclusions. The results show that the prevalence of CIDMO in our diabetic population was 0.5%. A significant proportion of macula oedema patients were found to have type 2 diabetes with long disease duration, suboptimal glycemic and hypertensive control, and low eGFR. The data support that medical and diabetic review of CIDMO patients is warranted particularly in the substantial number with poor glycemic control and if intravitreal therapies are indicated.

How accurate are photographic surrogate markers used to detect macular edema in the English national screening programme?

DESIGN. Retrospective analysis PURPOSE. Macular oedema is not directly visible on two dimensional digital photographs such that surrogate markers need to be used. In the English National Screening Programme these are exudate within one optic disc diameter (DD) of the fovea, group of exudates within two DD of the fovea and haemorrhages or microaneurysms (HMA) within one DD of the fovea with best corrected visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/9. All patients who present with any of these surrogate markers at screening are referred to an ophthalmology clinic for slit lamp examination. The purpose of this audit was to determine how many patients with positive maculopathy diagnosis on photography were truly identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT) with macular oedema. METHODS. Data was collected from patients attending digital diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients who presented with surrogate markers for macular oedema also had an OCT scan. The fast macula scan on the Stratus OCT was used and an ophthalmologist reviewed the scans to determine whether macular oedema was present. RESULTS. Maculopathy by exudates: Of 155 patients 45 (29%) showed thickening on the OCT of these 12 required laser. Those who also had pre-proliferative retinopathy (n=20) were more likely to have macular oedema (75%) than those with background diabetic retinopathy. Maculopathy by HMA and VA worse than 6/9: Of 66 patients 11 (16.7%) showed thickening on the OCT. 5 (7.6%) of these had macular oedema, 5 (7.6%) epi-retinal membrane, and 1 (1.5%) age related macular degeneration. None of these patients required laser. CONCLUSIONS. The likelihood of the presence of macular oedema and requiring laser treatment is greater with macular exudation than HMA within one DD and reduced VA. Overall the surrogate markers used show low specificity for macular oedema, however combining OCT with photography does identify those with macular oedema who require a true referral for an ophthalmological slit lamp examination.

Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (R3) referrals from the digital diabetic retinopathy screening program:urgency of appointment in the hospital eye service achieved and needed?

DESIGN. Retrospective analysis PURPOSE. To assess the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients identified with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) referred from the screening program to the hospital eye services (HES) METHODS. a retrospective analysis of urgently referred PDR cases to Birmingham Heartlands HES from august 2008 until July 2010 RESULTS. 130 urgent diabetic retinopathy referrals were made and reviewed. 103 (68% male, 80% type 2 diabetes) were referred for PDR with a mean age of 59 years, mean diabetes duration of 17.8years. 69% were on insulin treatment at the time of the screening, with mean HbA1c of 10.4% (range-5.7 to 16.5%). 65% of the patients were offered appointments at HES within two weeks after referral from the screening. 50.5% of the patients were seen in the HES within 2 weeks, 22 and 16 % were seen 2-4 and 4-8 weeks after referral respectively. 6 patients never attended ophthalmology examination during the two years of review. Of all the attendees, 56% were booked for pan retinal photocoagulation (PRP) & 9(9.3%) for macular laser respectively on their 1st HES visit. 75% of the patients were newly diagnosed PDR and 26 had previous PRP laser but lost to follow up. 63 patients ( 66%) received either PRP or macular laser treatment (85.7% of which is PRP). 63% of the PRP treatment was performed within a month of first HES attendance. Retinopathy grading discrepancy between the screening program and HES was noted in 20% (21 patients). CONCLUSIONS. This data suggests that the digital screening programme is appropriately identifying high risk patients with PDR with timely PRP laser treatment in the majority of patients but raises concern over patients lost to follow up (hence failsafe tracking of appointment attendance), and review of grading discrepancies between the ophthalmology and screening service.

The significance of microaneurysms and haemorrhages within one optic disc diameter of the fovea

Free paper session INTRODUCTION. Microaneurysms and haemorrhages within the macula area are a poor predictor of macular oedema as shown by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Our research suggests that it is safe and cost effective to screen patients who present with these surrogate markers annually. PURPOSE. To determine whether microaneurysms (ma) and haemorrhages (hm) within one optic disc diameter of the fovea (ma/hm<1DD) are significant predictors of macular oedema. METHODS. Data were collected over a one-year period from patients attending digital diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients who presented with ma/hm<1DD also had an OCT scan. The fast macula scan on the Stratus OCT was used and an ophthalmologist reviewed the scans to determine whether macular oedema was present. Macular oedema was identified by thickening on the OCT cross-sections. Patients were split into two groups. Group one (325 eyes) included those with best VA?6/9 and group two (30 eyes) with best VA =6/12. Only patients who had no other referable features of diabetic retinopathy were selected. RESULTS. In group one, 6 (1.8%) out of 325 eyes showed thickening on the OCT and were referred to hospital eye service (HES) for further investigation. In group two, 6 (20%) out of 30 eyes showed thickening and were referred to HES. CONCLUSIONS. Ma/hm<1DD become more significant predictors of macular oedema when VA is reduced. Results confirm the grading criteria concerning microaneurysms predicting macular oedema for referable maculopathy in the English national screening programme. OCT is a useful method to accurately identify patients requiring referral to HES.

Improving the cost-effectiveness of photographic screening for diabetic macular oedema:a prospective, multi-centre, UK study

Background/aims: Retinal screening programmes in England and Scotland have similar photographic grading schemes for background (non-proliferative) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy, but diverge over maculopathy. We looked for the most cost-effective method of identifying diabetic macular oedema from retinal photographs including the role of automated grading and optical coherence tomography, a technology that directly visualises oedema. Methods: Patients from seven UK centres were recruited. The following features in at least one eye were required for enrolment: microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages or blot haemorrhages within one disc diameter, or exudates within one or two disc diameters of the centre of the macula. Subjects had optical coherence tomography and digital photography. Manual and automated grading schemes were evaluated. Costs and QALYs were modelled using microsimulation techniques. Results: 3540 patients were recruited, 3170 were analysed. For diabetic macular oedema, England's scheme had a sensitivity of 72.6% and specificity of 66.8%; Scotland 's had a sensitivity of 59.5% and specificity of 79.0%. When applying a ceiling ratio of £30 000 per quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained, Scotland's scheme was preferred. Assuming automated grading could be implemented without increasing grading costs, automation produced a greater number of QALYS for a lower cost than England's scheme, but was not cost effective, at the study's operating point, compared with Scotland's. The addition of optical coherence tomography, to each scheme, resulted in cost savings without reducing health benefits. Conclusions: Retinal screening programmes in the UK should reconsider the screening pathway to make best use of existing and new technologies.

Evaluating digital diabetic retinopathy screening in people aged 90 years and over

To evaluate the effectiveness of digital diabetic retinopathy screening in patients aged 90 years and over.MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of 200 randomly selected patients eligible for diabetic retinopathy screening aged 90 years and over within the Birmingham, Solihull, and Black Country Screening Programme.ResultsOne hundred and seventy-nine (90%) patients attended screening at least once. 133 (74%) annual screening after their first screen, of whom 59% had no detectable diabetic retinopathy; 38 (21%) were referred for ophthalmology clinical assessment-36 for nondiabetic retinopathy reasons and two for diabetic maculopathy. Cataract accounted for 50% of all referrals for ophthalmology clinical assessment. Of the 133 patients placed on annual screening, 93 (70%) were screened at least once more. In terms of level of diabetic retinopathy, assessability or other ocular pathologies, 8 improved, 51 remained stable, and 31 deteriorated. Of the latter, 19 patients were referred for ophthalmology clinical assessment; none of these for diabetic retinopathy.ConclusionsScreening provides opportunistic identification of important nondiabetic retinopathy eye conditions. However, in view of the low identification rate of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in patients aged 90 years and over, and the current mission statement of the NHS Diabetic Eye Screening Programme, systematic annual diabetic retinopathy screening may not be justified in this age group of patients, but rather be performed in optometric practice.

Improving the economic value of photographic screening for optical coherence tomography-detectable macular oedema:a prospective, multicentre, UK study

Objectives: To determine the best photographic surrogate markers for detecting sight-threatening macular oedema (MO) in people with diabetes attending UK national screening programmes. Design: A multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of 3170 patients with photographic signs of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region [exudates within two disc diameters, microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages (M/DHs) and blot haemorrhages (BHs)] who were recruited from seven study centres. Setting: All patients were recruited and imaged at one of seven study centres in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Dundee, Dunfermline, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Oxford. Participants: Subjects with features of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region attending one of seven diabetic retinal screening programmes. Interventions: Alternative referral criteria for suspected MO based on photographic surrogate markers; an optical coherence tomographic examination in addition to the standard digital retinal photograph. Main outcome measures: (1) To determine the best method to detect sight-threatening MO in people with diabetes using photographic surrogate markers. (2) Sensitivity and specificity estimates to assess the costs and consequences of using alternative strategies. (3) Modelled long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results: Prevalence of MO was strongly related to the presence of lesions and was roughly five times higher in subjects with exudates or BHs or more than two M/DHs within one disc diameter. Having worse visual acuity was associated with about a fivefold higher prevalence of MO. Current manual screening grading schemes that ignore visual acuity or the presence of M/DHs could be improved by taking these into account. Health service costs increase substantially with more sensitive/less specific strategies. A fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, is superior to all current manual grading schemes for detecting MO in people with diabetes. The addition of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to each strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected. Conclusions: Compared with all current manual grading schemes, for the same sensitivity, a fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, achieves a higher specificity for detecting MO in people with diabetes, especially if visual acuity is included in the automated strategy. Overall, costs to the health service are likely to increase if more sensitive referral strategies are adopted over more specific screening strategies for MO, for only very small gains in QALYs. The addition of OCT to each screening strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected. © Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO 2013.

Is it safe to increase diabetic retinopathy screening intervals in patients with no/background diabetic retinopathy?

Patients who present with background DR should continue to be screened annually as a high prportion of these patients develop sight threatening DR (12%). A low prportion of patients with no DR at baseline were referred for STDR (1.3%). Out of the 51 patients in this category referred only 1 required laser. The authors suggest that patients graded R0M0 could be screened biannually.

Is it safe to increase diabetic retinopathy screening intervals in patients with no background diabetic retinopathy?

Introduction. A 4 year retrospective follow up of 996 patients who pre-sented with no DR and 500 with background DR at baseline digital DR screening in 2006. Purpose. To evaluate the safety of increasing screening intervals in patients with no diabetic retinopathy (DR) or with background DR.Methods. A 4 year retrospective follow up of 996 patients who presented with no DR and 500 with background DR at baseline digital DR screening in 2006.results. Background DR Group: Of the 500 subjects that had back-ground DR in 2006, 231 were referred for DR, with an average DR routine referral rate of 12% (46 subjects) per year. nodrgrouP. Of the 996 patients who had no DR at baseline, 51 were referred over the 4 years for sight threatening DR (STDR), of these 45 patients have definite STDR confirmed by ophthalmological examination. 78% of these had type 2 diabetes and mean age at referral was 60 years (25-87). Mean diabetes duration was 10.7 years (3-32), with a mean HbA1c of 7.8% (5.7-11.3%). Eight patients (0.9%) were referred in the first year, 9 (0.9%) in the second year, 19 (1.9%) in the third year and 15 (1.5%) in the fourth year. 86% of referrals were for maculopathy, and all had observable retinopathy and none required ophthalmology clinic assessment or laser treatment.If biannual screening was adopted for patients with no DR at baseline, allowing for patients who subsequently develop background DR and would then revert to annual screening, a total of 7 (0.7%) patients would not have been appropriately referred for STDR and would have waited a further year for identification. None of the 51 referrals across the 4 years required laser treatment apart from just one patient who developed PDR in year 4 (2010) and had background since 2007.conclusIons. It could be recommended that it is safe to screen pa-tients with no DR biannually due to the low risk of developing STDR. However, patients who present with background DR should continue to be screened annually as there is a significant proportion developing STDR and would not be identified at an appropriate screening interval.