AbstractAimsEndothelial dysfunction is an early risk marker of cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus. Timely screening is important in reducing cardiovascular disease-associated morbidity and mortality. This cross-sectional study investigates the acceptability and preferability of non-invasive cardiovascular risk procedures (EndoPAT2000 system and the ECG-gated fundoscope) in participants with diabetes mellitus compared to controls.MethodsA self-administered Likert scale-based questionnaire was completed by 106 controls and 117 participants with diabetes mellitus, identified through stratified random sampling, upon conclusion of an Australian Heart Eye sub-study conducted at Westmead Hospital, NSW, Australia from 2012 to 2014. Pearson’sχ²test, independent-samples t-test and regression analysis were performed.ResultsStudy participants who responded to the questionnaire had no preference for procedures (controls: 2.4 ± 1.1 vs diabetes mellitus: 2.5 ± 0.9,p = 0.38) but had an overall more negative experience with most aspects of the ECG-gated fundoscope than the EndoPAT2000 system. Of those with diabetes mellitus, participants who provided poorer self-rated health expressed discomfort with the mydriatic drops (ß 0.27, 95%CI 0.001 - 0.54,p = 0.049) and the fundoscope’s green light filter (ß 0.27, 95%CI 0.07 - 0.47,p = 0.009), as well as maintaining still (ß 0.40, 95%CI 0.08 - 0.72,p = 0.02) and not blinking (ß 0.38, 95%CI 0.07 - 0.70,p = 0.02) during photo acquisition. These participants were also less willing to repeat the ECG-gated fundoscope procedure (ß 0.29, 95%CI 0.07 - 0.52,p = 0.01).ConclusionsParticipants with diabetes mellitus, especially with poorer self-rated health, had a more negative experience with the ECG-gated fundoscope than the EndoPAT2000 system. Difficulties experienced under examination by the ECG-gated fundoscope appear related to the procedural design, which requires amendments improving patient comfort and compliance.