UK screening programmes — MCQs

10 questions

A 43-year-old woman presents asking about strategies to reduce her breast cancer risk. Her mother was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 48 and her maternal aunt at age 52. She has no personal history of breast disease. Clinical examination is normal. She takes the combined oral contraceptive pill and drinks 10 units of alcohol weekly. Her BMI is 26 kg/m². After appropriate genetic assessment, she is found not to carry BRCA mutations. Which lifestyle modification would provide the greatest reduction in her breast cancer risk?

A 55-year-old woman with a BMI of 32 kg/m² attends for weight management support. She has tried multiple diets without sustained success. She has no other medical conditions. She asks about pharmacological options for weight loss. According to NICE guidance, what is the threshold for considering orlistat in this patient?

A 71-year-old woman with type 2 diabetes for 18 years attends for review. Her diabetic eye screening report from 2 weeks ago shows 'proliferative diabetic retinopathy with new vessels at disc in left eye'. She reports no visual symptoms. Her HbA1c is 72 mmol/mol, BP 156/88 mmHg. She has not yet received any ophthalmology appointment. What is the most appropriate action?

A 29-year-old woman attends for preconception counselling. She is planning pregnancy with her partner. She had one previous pregnancy 3 years ago with uncomplicated vaginal delivery. She takes no regular medications and has no chronic conditions. Which of the following screening tests should be offered before conception?

A 46-year-old man attends for cardiovascular risk assessment. He drinks 6 pints of beer (4.5% ABV) on Friday and Saturday nights. He works in construction and is physically active. BMI is 27 kg/m², BP 134/84 mmHg. He asks about reducing his drinking. According to current UK Chief Medical Officers' guidelines, how many units of alcohol does he consume weekly?

A 58-year-old woman attends for NHS Health Check. She has a BMI of 28 kg/m², BP 128/82 mmHg, and smokes 10 cigarettes daily. Bloods show total cholesterol 5.2 mmol/L, HDL 1.4 mmol/L, HbA1c 39 mmol/mol. Her QRISK3 score is 8.5%. She is motivated to improve her health. What is the most evidence-based lifestyle intervention to offer?

A 42-year-old man presents for cardiovascular risk assessment. He has no past medical history, is a non-smoker with BMI 26 kg/m². Blood tests show total cholesterol 7.8 mmol/L, HDL 1.1 mmol/L, non-HDL 6.7 mmol/L, fasting glucose 5.2 mmol/L. His father died of myocardial infarction aged 44 years. What is the most appropriate initial management?

A 35-year-old woman attends with her cervical screening result. The hrHPV test is positive but cytology shows 'inadequate sample'. She had a normal screening result 3 years ago and has had no abnormal vaginal bleeding. What is the most appropriate next step?

A 40-year-old man attends for an NHS Health Check. He is of South Asian ethnicity, works as an accountant, and is sedentary. His BMI is 26 kg/m², BP 128/78 mmHg, and he is a non-smoker. Fasting blood tests show glucose 6.2 mmol/L and HbA1c 41 mmol/mol. His QRISK3 score is 6.5%. He asks what lifestyle changes would be most effective at reducing his future diabetes risk given his ethnic background. Which advice is most appropriate?

Q10

A 72-year-old woman with longstanding type 2 diabetes attends following her diabetic eye screening result, which reports 'ungradable images due to cataracts'. She had a similar result last year. Her visual acuity is 6/12 in both eyes, which she says is unchanged. She manages her diabetes and daily activities independently. Her recent HbA1c is 58 mmol/mol. What is the most appropriate management of this screening result?

UK screening programmes UK Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs

Question 1: A 43-year-old woman presents asking about strategies to reduce her breast cancer risk. Her mother was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 48 and her maternal aunt at age 52. She has no personal history of breast disease. Clinical examination is normal. She takes the combined oral contraceptive pill and drinks 10 units of alcohol weekly. Her BMI is 26 kg/m². After appropriate genetic assessment, she is found not to carry BRCA mutations. Which lifestyle modification would provide the greatest reduction in her breast cancer risk?

A. Stopping the combined oral contraceptive pill
B. Reducing alcohol intake to below 5 units per week (Correct Answer)
C. Achieving and maintaining BMI <25 kg/m² through weight loss
D. Undertaking regular vigorous physical activity 150 minutes weekly
E. Adopting a plant-based Mediterranean diet low in processed foods

Explanation: ***Reducing alcohol intake to below 5 units per week*** - There is a well-established **dose-response relationship** between alcohol consumption and breast cancer risk, where each unit consumed per day increases risk by approximately **7-10%**. - Reducing consumption from 10 units to below 5 units per week represents a significant risk reduction that is more impactful than other lifestyle changes in a **pre-menopausal** woman with a modest BMI and moderate alcohol intake. *Stopping the combined oral contraceptive pill* - While the **combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP)** is associated with a small relative risk increase (RR ~1.2), this risk is transient and **returns to baseline** 10 years after cessation. - The absolute risk reduction from stopping the pill in a 43-year-old is generally lower than that achieved through significant **alcohol modification**. *Achieving and maintaining BMI <25 kg/m² through weight loss* - Elevated **BMI** is primarily a significant risk factor for **post-menopausal** breast cancer due to peripheral aromatization of androgens in adipose tissue. - In **pre-menopausal** women like this patient, the association between obesity and breast cancer is less pronounced, and her current BMI of 26 kg/m² is only **borderline overweight**. *Undertaking regular vigorous physical activity 150 minutes weekly* - **Physical activity** provides a modest reduction in risk (approx. 10-20%), largely mediated through secondary effects like **weight management** and hormonal regulation. - While beneficial for overall health, the magnitude of specific breast cancer risk reduction is typically less than that achieved by **halving alcohol intake**. *Adopting a plant-based Mediterranean diet low in processed foods* - Although a **Mediterranean diet** is associated with lower overall cancer mortality and improved cardiovascular health, its specific impact on breast cancer risk is less clinically proven than **alcohol restriction**. - Dietary changes are often recommended as part of a holistic approach but do not show the same **linear correlation** with risk reduction as limiting alcohol.

Question 2: A 55-year-old woman with a BMI of 32 kg/m² attends for weight management support. She has tried multiple diets without sustained success. She has no other medical conditions. She asks about pharmacological options for weight loss. According to NICE guidance, what is the threshold for considering orlistat in this patient?

A. BMI ≥25 kg/m² with commitment to dietary changes
B. BMI ≥28 kg/m² with obesity-related comorbidities
C. BMI ≥30 kg/m² with commitment to dietary and lifestyle changes (Correct Answer)
D. BMI ≥32 kg/m² after failed conservative management
E. BMI ≥35 kg/m² or BMI ≥30 kg/m² with comorbidities

Explanation: ***BMI ≥30 kg/m² with commitment to dietary and lifestyle changes*** - According to **NICE guidelines**, orlistat is indicated for adults with a **BMI of 30 kg/m² or more** as a primary threshold, even in the absence of comorbidities. - The prescription of orlistat must always be part of a comprehensive weight management program that includes **dietary modification**, increased physical activity, and **behavioral support**. *BMI ≥25 kg/m² with commitment to dietary changes* - A **BMI of 25 kg/m²** signifies **overweight**, for which pharmacological interventions like orlistat are not typically recommended by NICE. - Management at this stage primarily focuses on **lifestyle modifications**, including diet and exercise, without drug therapy. *BMI ≥28 kg/m² with obesity-related comorbidities* - Orlistat can be considered at a **BMI of 28 kg/m² or more** but specifically requires the presence of **obesity-related comorbidities**, such as type 2 diabetes or hypertension. - The patient in this scenario has **no other medical conditions**, meaning this specific threshold does not apply to her. *BMI ≥32 kg/m² after failed conservative management* - While the patient's BMI is 32 kg/m², this specific value is not the **minimum NICE threshold** for initiating orlistat, which is **BMI ≥30 kg/m²**. - Adhering to the established guidelines ensures appropriate and timely access to pharmacological support for eligible individuals. *BMI ≥35 kg/m² or BMI ≥30 kg/m² with comorbidities* - This threshold is generally more aligned with the criteria for referral to **bariatric surgery** rather than the initial prescription of orlistat. - Applying this higher criterion would unnecessarily delay pharmacological intervention for patients who meet the lower, more appropriate threshold for orlistat.

Question 3: A 71-year-old woman with type 2 diabetes for 18 years attends for review. Her diabetic eye screening report from 2 weeks ago shows 'proliferative diabetic retinopathy with new vessels at disc in left eye'. She reports no visual symptoms. Her HbA1c is 72 mmol/mol, BP 156/88 mmHg. She has not yet received any ophthalmology appointment. What is the most appropriate action?

A. Contact ophthalmology to confirm urgent referral has been received and processed (Correct Answer)
B. Reassure that ophthalmology will contact her within 2 weeks of screening report
C. Arrange repeat diabetic eye screening in 3 months to monitor progression
D. Refer urgently to ophthalmology via GP pathway in case screening referral was missed
E. Optimize glycaemic and blood pressure control and wait for screening programme referral

Explanation: ***Contact ophthalmology to confirm urgent referral has been received and processed***- **Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR)** with **new vessels at the disc (NVD)** is a sight-threatening condition that requires an **urgent referral** and treatment within **2 weeks**.- Since the patient has not received an appointment after 2 weeks, active verification is necessary to prevent **permanent vision loss** due to potential administrative or system failures.*Reassure that ophthalmology will contact her within 2 weeks of screening report*- Passive reassurance is unsafe because the **2-week target** for assessment has already been reached without the patient being contacted.- Relying solely on the screening program's automation may lead to delays in treating high-risk **neovascularization**.*Arrange repeat diabetic eye screening in 3 months to monitor progression*- Repeat screening is contraindicated once **referable retinopathy** is identified; the screening process has already served its purpose of detection.- Delayed treatment of PDR increases the risk of **vitreous hemorrhage** and **tractional retinal detachment**.*Refer urgently to ophthalmology via GP pathway in case screening referral was missed*- Sending a duplicate referral via the GP pathway can cause **administrative confusion** and may not be as direct as contacting the department regarding the existing screening referral.- The priority is to confirm the status of the **integrated screening-to-treatment pathway** specifically designed for these cases.*Optimize glycaemic and blood pressure control and wait for screening programme referral*- While **HbA1c** and **blood pressure optimization** are vital for long-term management, they do not replace the need for immediate **panretinal photocoagulation** or other specialist interventions.- Waiting indefinitely for a system-triggered referral when a critical deadline has passed places the patient at significant risk of **sudden blindness**.

Question 4: A 29-year-old woman attends for preconception counselling. She is planning pregnancy with her partner. She had one previous pregnancy 3 years ago with uncomplicated vaginal delivery. She takes no regular medications and has no chronic conditions. Which of the following screening tests should be offered before conception?

A. Rubella immunity only, as other infections are tested in pregnancy (Correct Answer)
B. No infectious disease screening needed as she had testing in previous pregnancy
C. Rubella immunity, HIV, hepatitis B, and syphilis serology
D. Full sexually transmitted infection screen including chlamydia and gonorrhoea
E. HIV and syphilis testing only if high-risk factors identified

Explanation: ***Rubella immunity only, as other infections are tested in pregnancy*** - Identifying **rubella immunity status** preconception is vital because the **MMR vaccine** is a live vaccine and cannot be administered during pregnancy due to potential teratogenic risks. - Routine screening for HIV, hepatitis B, and syphilis is standard practice at the **antenatal booking appointment** (usually in the first trimester), rather than preconception, as infection status can change. *No infectious disease screening needed as she had testing in previous pregnancy* - **Immunity** or **infection status** can change over time; for instance, rubella immunity can wane, and new exposures to other pathogens may have occurred since the last delivery. - National guidelines recommend reassessment of **vaccination history** and immunity for every planned pregnancy to ensure optimal fetal protection. *Rubella immunity, HIV, hepatitis B, and syphilis serology* - While all are important, testing for HIV, hepatitis B, and syphilis is specifically timed for the **first trimester** to align with established antenatal management pathways and optimize timing for interventions. - Universal preconception screening for all these infections is not typically recommended unless specific **clinical risk factors** are identified during the consultation, whereas rubella is universally recommended. *Full sexually transmitted infection screen including chlamydia and gonorrhoea* - Broad STI screening for **chlamydia and gonorrhoea** is not a universal preconception requirement for asymptomatic women in low-risk groups, as this patient appears to be. - These tests are generally reserved for patients presenting with **symptoms** or those with a high-risk sexual history, rather than being part of routine preconception screening. *HIV and syphilis testing only if high-risk factors identified* - This option incorrectly omits **rubella screening**, which is the primary infectious disease intervention universally recommended for all women seeking preconception care. - Regardless of identified high-risk factors, HIV and syphilis are still offered to all pregnant women as part of the **routine antenatal screening program** once pregnancy is confirmed.

Question 5: A 46-year-old man attends for cardiovascular risk assessment. He drinks 6 pints of beer (4.5% ABV) on Friday and Saturday nights. He works in construction and is physically active. BMI is 27 kg/m², BP 134/84 mmHg. He asks about reducing his drinking. According to current UK Chief Medical Officers' guidelines, how many units of alcohol does he consume weekly?

A. 14 units
B. 24 units
C. 30.6 units (Correct Answer)
D. 36 units
E. 42 units

Explanation: ***30.6 units***- Alcohol units are calculated using the formula: **Volume (ml) × ABV (%) / 1000**. One UK pint is **568 ml**, making one 4.5% ABV beer equal to **2.556 units**.- The patient consumes 12 pints per week (6 on Friday and 6 on Saturday), so total consumption is **12 × 2.556 = 30.672 units**, which is significantly above the **UK Chief Medical Officers' low-risk limit of 14 units** weekly.*14 units*- This represents the **maximum recommended weekly limit** for both men and women in the UK to keep health risks low.- While a target for reduction for this patient, it does not reflect his current actual intake of **12 pints** per week.*24 units*- This value would imply that each pint contains exactly **2 units**, which is not accurate for a 4.5% ABV beer.- A pint of 4.5% ABV beer is actually **2.556 units**, making 12 pints total **30.6 units**.*36 units*- This figure would suggest an incorrect calculation where each pint is assumed to be **3 units**, which is typically associated with stronger beers (around 5.3% ABV).- Using the precise **4.5% ABV** given, the correct calculation yields **30.6 units**.*42 units*- This value would result from assuming approximately **3.5 units per pint**, which is characteristic of much stronger lagers or ciders (around 6% ABV).- The accurate calculation based on the specified **4.5% ABV** confirms the patient's intake is **30.6 units**.

Question 6: A 58-year-old woman attends for NHS Health Check. She has a BMI of 28 kg/m², BP 128/82 mmHg, and smokes 10 cigarettes daily. Bloods show total cholesterol 5.2 mmol/L, HDL 1.4 mmol/L, HbA1c 39 mmol/mol. Her QRISK3 score is 8.5%. She is motivated to improve her health. What is the most evidence-based lifestyle intervention to offer?

A. Smoking cessation support with varenicline or combination NRT (Correct Answer)
B. Exercise programme targeting 150 minutes moderate activity per week
C. Weight loss programme targeting 5-10% body weight reduction
D. Mediterranean diet advice with emphasis on reducing saturated fat
E. Combined lifestyle intervention addressing all modifiable risk factors

Explanation: ***Smoking cessation support with varenicline or combination NRT***- Smoking cessation provides the **single greatest reduction** in cardiovascular risk and overall mortality compared to any other modifiable risk factor intervention.- According to **NICE guidelines (NG92)**, the gold standard for smoking cessation is combining **behavioral support** with pharmacotherapy like varenicline or combination NRT, which significantly reduces CV risk. *Exercise programme targeting 150 minutes moderate activity per week*- While physical activity improves metabolic health and reduces **QRISK3 profiles**, it does not match the magnitude of **mortality reduction** seen with quitting tobacco.- Physical activity is a foundational recommendation, but it is considered secondary to **direct toxin elimination** in a current smoker. *Weight loss programme targeting 5-10% body weight reduction*- The patient’s BMI (28 kg/m²) is classified as **overweight** rather than obese, making weight loss less clinically urgent than addressing her **smoking status**.- Weight loss primarily targets **HbA1c and BP control**, but her levels of these markers are currently within or near acceptable ranges. *Mediterranean diet advice with emphasis on reducing saturated fat*- A **Mediterranean diet** is recommended for primary prevention of CVD, but it does not address the acute **thrombogenic and inflammatory** risks posed by active smoking.- Her lipid profile (Total Cholesterol 5.2, HDL 1.4) is relatively stable, meaning dietary changes would yield **smaller incremental gains** in survival. *Combined lifestyle intervention addressing all modifiable risk factors*- While all factors are important, evidence-based practice requires **prioritizing the intervention** with the highest impact; splitting focus may dilute the efficacy of **tobacco cessation**.- Smoking cessation is the most **cost-effective and clinically significant** individual intervention for a patient with a QRISK3 score below the 10% statin threshold.

Question 7: A 42-year-old man presents for cardiovascular risk assessment. He has no past medical history, is a non-smoker with BMI 26 kg/m². Blood tests show total cholesterol 7.8 mmol/L, HDL 1.1 mmol/L, non-HDL 6.7 mmol/L, fasting glucose 5.2 mmol/L. His father died of myocardial infarction aged 44 years. What is the most appropriate initial management?

A. Calculate QRISK3 score and consider statin if >10%
B. Start atorvastatin 20 mg without risk calculation
C. Refer to lipid clinic for assessment of familial hypercholesterolaemia (Correct Answer)
D. Arrange genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia
E. Repeat lipid profile in 3 months with lifestyle advice

Explanation: ***Refer to lipid clinic for assessment of familial hypercholesterolaemia***- This patient meets the **Simon Broome criteria** for suspected **familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH)** due to a **total cholesterol >7.5 mmol/L** and a first-degree relative with **premature coronary heart disease** (MI before age 55 in a male relative).- **NICE guidelines** recommend direct **referral to a specialist lipid clinic** for definitive diagnosis, comprehensive management, and to initiate **cascade testing** for at-risk family members, given the very high lifetime cardiovascular risk.*Calculate QRISK3 score and consider statin if >10%*- Cardiovascular risk scores like **QRISK3** are **not appropriate** for patients with suspected FH as they significantly **underestimate the lifetime risk** of cardiovascular events in these individuals.- **NICE guidelines** explicitly state that a total cholesterol above **7.5 mmol/L** (or LDL-C >4.9 mmol/L) should trigger suspicion of FH, leading to direct referral rather than routine risk calculation.*Start atorvastatin 20 mg without risk calculation*- While statin therapy is essential for FH, starting a standard **primary prevention dose** of 20 mg without specialist assessment may lead to **under-treatment** for an inherited high-risk condition requiring higher intensity lipid lowering.- Specialist referral ensures proper diagnosis, optimal treatment intensity, and crucial **cascade screening** for family members, which is paramount in FH management.*Arrange genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia*- Genetic testing for FH is a specialized investigation that is typically arranged by **specialist lipid services** once a clinical diagnosis is strongly suspected and confirmed by a clinician.- Clinical diagnosis based on **Simon Broome criteria** is usually sufficient for initial referral and management; genetic testing is often used to confirm the diagnosis, identify specific mutations, and aid cascade testing, but it follows clinical assessment.*Repeat lipid profile in 3 months with lifestyle advice*- Given the highly elevated **total cholesterol (7.8 mmol/L)** and strong family history of **premature MI**, a repeat lipid profile after lifestyle advice would inappropriately delay crucial diagnosis and initiation of effective treatment for FH.- Lifestyle interventions alone are generally **insufficient** to achieve target lipid levels in patients with FH due to the underlying genetic defect, and delaying definitive management increases cardiovascular risk.

Question 8: A 35-year-old woman attends with her cervical screening result. The hrHPV test is positive but cytology shows 'inadequate sample'. She had a normal screening result 3 years ago and has had no abnormal vaginal bleeding. What is the most appropriate next step?

A. Repeat cervical sample in 3 months (Correct Answer)
B. Repeat cervical sample immediately
C. Refer for urgent colposcopy within 2 weeks
D. Refer for routine colposcopy
E. Arrange repeat sample in 12 months

Explanation: ***Repeat cervical sample in 3 months*** - When **high-risk HPV (hrHPV)** is detected but the cytology is **inadequate**, a repeat sample is required specifically at a **3-month interval** to allow the cervical epithelium to regenerate. - This follow-up ensures that if a high-grade lesion or **persistent HPV** is present, it can be appropriately triaged after obtaining a readable slide. *Repeat cervical sample immediately* - Repeating the smear immediately is discouraged because the transformation zone needs approximately **3 months** to heal and provide a representative cellular sample. - Re-sampling too early increases the risk of a second **inadequate result** due to insufficient squamous or glandular cells. *Refer for urgent colposcopy within 2 weeks* - Urgent 2-week wait referrals are reserved for patients with clinical suspicion of **cervical cancer** (e.g., suspicious mass or unexplained bleeding), which is not present here. - An **inadequate cytology** result alone is not an indication for an urgent cancer-pathway referral. *Refer for routine colposcopy* - Routine **colposcopy** is indicated after two consecutive **inadequate samples** or if cytology shows abnormalities like **dyskaryosis** alongside a positive hrHPV result. - A single inadequate sample in an asymptomatic patient does not meet the criteria for direct specialist referral. *Arrange repeat sample in 12 months* - A **12-month repeat** is the protocol for patients who are **hrHPV positive with negative cytology**, not for those with inadequate samples. - Waiting 12 months would be inappropriate as it risks a delayed diagnosis of potential underlying pathology that was not assessable on the **inadequate slide**.

Question 9: A 40-year-old man attends for an NHS Health Check. He is of South Asian ethnicity, works as an accountant, and is sedentary. His BMI is 26 kg/m², BP 128/78 mmHg, and he is a non-smoker. Fasting blood tests show glucose 6.2 mmol/L and HbA1c 41 mmol/mol. His QRISK3 score is 6.5%. He asks what lifestyle changes would be most effective at reducing his future diabetes risk given his ethnic background. Which advice is most appropriate?

A. Focus on weight reduction to achieve BMI <25 kg/m² as South Asian populations have lower BMI thresholds for metabolic risk
B. Commence metformin for diabetes prevention as he meets criteria for intermediate hyperglycaemia
C. Intensive dietary modification emphasising low glycaemic index foods and reduced refined carbohydrates
D. Structured exercise programme with at least 150 minutes moderate-intensity activity per week combined with dietary advice (Correct Answer)
E. Arrange referral to tier 3 weight management service given his elevated diabetes risk

Explanation: ***Structured exercise programme with at least 150 minutes moderate-intensity activity per week combined with dietary advice***- This patient has **impaired fasting glucose** (IFG), and evidence-based guidelines (like the Diabetes Prevention Programme) show that combined **intensive lifestyle intervention** reduces diabetes risk by approximately 58%.- **South Asian** populations are at higher metabolic risk at lower BMIs; a **structured programme** addressing both physical activity and nutrition is the gold standard for prevention in this demographic.*Focus on weight reduction to achieve BMI <25 kg/m² as South Asian populations have lower BMI thresholds for metabolic risk*- While the BMI threshold for "overweight" is lower in South Asian patients (**23 kg/m²**), weight loss is only one component of the necessary lifestyle shift.- Focusing solely on a BMI number is less effective than the **combination of diet and aerobic exercise** for improving insulin sensitivity.*Commence metformin for diabetes prevention as he meets criteria for intermediate hyperglycaemia*- **Metformin** is generally reserved for patients where lifestyle interventions have failed or for those at exceptionally high risk (e.g., HbA1c 42–47 mmol/mol).- Lifestyle changes have been proven in clinical trials to be significantly **more effective** than metformin (58% vs 31% risk reduction) for diabetes prevention.*Intensive dietary modification emphasising low glycaemic index foods and reduced refined carbohydrates*- Diet is a crucial pillar, but isolated dietary advice without a **structured exercise** component is suboptimal for managing **prediabetes**.- Evidence supports the synergy of **physical activity** and nutrition over a single-focus dietary approach to delay the onset of Type 2 Diabetes.*Arrange referral to tier 3 weight management service given his elevated diabetes risk*- **Tier 3 services** are multidisciplinary teams intended for patients with **BMI ≥40 kg/m²** (or ≥35 kg/m² with comorbidities), which does not apply to this patient.- This patient's needs are best met through **Primary Care** or community-based **National Diabetes Prevention Programmes** (Tier 2 levels).

Question 10: A 72-year-old woman with longstanding type 2 diabetes attends following her diabetic eye screening result, which reports 'ungradable images due to cataracts'. She had a similar result last year. Her visual acuity is 6/12 in both eyes, which she says is unchanged. She manages her diabetes and daily activities independently. Her recent HbA1c is 58 mmol/mol. What is the most appropriate management of this screening result?

A. Refer to ophthalmology for cataract surgery assessment and retinopathy evaluation (Correct Answer)
B. Repeat diabetic eye screening in 12 months as per standard protocol
C. Arrange optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging to assess for maculopathy
D. Discharge from diabetic eye screening programme as screening is not possible
E. Arrange urgent ophthalmology referral under 2-week wait pathway for possible sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy

Explanation: ***Refer to ophthalmology for cataract surgery assessment and retinopathy evaluation*** - When **diabetic eye screening** images are **ungradable** for two consecutive years due to **cataracts**, it necessitates a referral to **ophthalmology** for a comprehensive slit-lamp examination. - This ensures that **diabetic retinopathy** is not missed and allows for assessment of the need for **cataract surgery** to enable clearer retinal views for future screening. *Repeat diabetic eye screening in 12 months as per standard protocol* - Repeating the standard **diabetic eye screening** is inappropriate as the underlying **cataracts** will likely lead to another **ungradable result**. - This approach would delay proper evaluation and potential management of any underlying **diabetic retinopathy** or the cataracts themselves. *Arrange optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging to assess for maculopathy* - **OCT** is useful for assessing **macular edema** but would still be compromised by the significant **cataracts** preventing clear imaging of the retina. - The primary issue is a **media opacity**, which requires a clinical **fundoscopic examination** by an ophthalmologist rather than another photographic imaging technique. *Discharge from diabetic eye screening programme as screening is not possible* - All patients with diabetes require continuous **retinal surveillance** to prevent and manage **diabetic retinopathy**, even if standard screening is difficult. - An **ungradable result** prompts a referral to specialists for alternative assessment methods, not discharge from the essential screening program. *Arrange urgent ophthalmology referral under 2-week wait pathway for possible sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy* - A **2-week wait referral** is typically reserved for urgent suspicion of malignancy or rapidly progressive, severe sight-threatening conditions requiring immediate intervention. - The patient's **stable visual acuity** (6/12) and lack of acute symptoms do not warrant an emergency 2-week wait pathway; a routine or urgent (but not 2-week) ophthalmology referral is more appropriate.

Want unlimited practice?

Get full access to all questions, explanations, and performance tracking.

Start For Free