BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of visual impairment in patients with diabetes mellitus. The prevalence of DME globally is around 6.8 % and in Ethiopia range from 5.7% to 11%.Different factors are associated with DME including poor glycemic control, longer duration, hypertension, dyslipidemia OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and associated factors of diabetic macular edema among diabetic patients attending University of Gondar (UOG) hospital, tertiary eye care and training center, NW Ethiopia METHODS: A hospital based cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2021 to October 2021. Socio-demographic, clinical and laboratory data of patients was gathered. The collected data was entered into epi-data 4.6 version, exported to SPSS version 20 and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 165 diabetic patients were enrolled with mean age of 54.71 ±13.66 years, 50.9% male, 85.5% urban dwellers, 79.9% type 2 DM, 49.7% on oral hypoglycemic agents and the mean duration of diabetes was 7.93 years. Cataract was the commonest ocular morbidity and 42% of patients had at least mild vision impairment. The overall prevalence of DME was 17% and 5.5% of patients had clinically significant macular edema (CSME). The presence of proteinuria was 8.04 times more likely to have DME. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of DME among our patients was high. The presence of proteinuria was significantly associated with DME. Screening of diabetic patients for sight threatening retinopathy early and appropriate treatment is recommended.

Background As countries reach the trachoma elimination threshold and cases of trachomatous inflammation follicular (TF) become rare, it becomes difficult to train survey graders to recognize clinical signs. We assess the use of photography as a grading tool, the efficiency of an in-country grading center and the comparability of field and photographic grading. Methods During January–February 2017 surveys in Amhara, Ethiopia, field graders assessed TF, trachomatous inflammation intense (TI) and trachomatous scarring (TS). Photographs were taken from each conjunctiva and later graded at the Gondar Grading Center (GGC) at the University of Gondar in Amhara. Two trained ophthalmology residents graded each set of photographs and a third grader provided an adjudicating grade when needed. Results A total of 4953 photographs of 2477 conjunctivae from 1241 participants in 10 communities were graded over 5 d at the GGC. Six examined participants were not photographed. Agreement between field and photographic grades were for TF: percent agreement (PA) 96.7%, κ=0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64 to 0.77; for TI: PA 94.7%, κ=0.32 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.43); and for TS: PA 83.5%, κ=0.22 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.29). Conclusions Conjunctival photography may be a solution for programs near the elimination threshold where there are few available community cases for training field graders.