加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT 6 >uQt:e  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes #G~wE*VR$  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to -R8/`M8GbD  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 4 +I 3+a"  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual |?yE^$a  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than pU@YiwP"]x  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination `GS cRhbh  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography B'#4;R!8P=  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who xy vND  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ,zoB0([  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or =-m(\ }  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. HoL~j({  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne >~^`5a`$uI  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 6N?#b66  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria %rw}u"3T  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract  d~sJ=)  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had wePI*."]  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 @Jm.HST#S8  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber G"{4'LlA  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber %6N)G!P  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated dD o6fP2  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or *|^,DGfQ6  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven .Jptj  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate X8i[fk1.R  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 1y 1_6TZ+  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%  k~{Fnkt  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone VZHr-z$6n  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an Bj; [  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision >B`Cch/ 'U  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no )sRN!~  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural U&`6&$]  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance CcBQo8!G  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated W8< @sq~I  
cataract. w<Zdq}{jO  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 0h^uOA; c  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced bAN10U  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of h>~jQ&\M  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes K *TnUQ  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 1X[ 73  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health m\_+)eI|  
services accessibility, prevalence 0K&_D)  
INTRODUCTION j[_t6Z  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 3(aRs?/ O  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all ]U_5\$  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate f+{c1fb>s  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be GVeL~Q  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 sq6>DuBZz  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting EV:_Kx8fP  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is Y,3z-Pa=@  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in `Q:de~+AM{  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists bjuYA/w<  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather NKRaQ r  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ,jAx%]@,I  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 2O?Vr" A  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for =n> iQS  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has &B?@@ 6  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 rdXCWK$E  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is `)0Rv|?  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the t8L<x  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract xeJ9H~^  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence ^RYn8I  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors /p[|DJo M  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to AQE eIFH  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. s@[C&v  
METHODS }@3Ud ' Y  
Study population A M>Yj  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual k)?,xY\AV  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 RY>)eGJ  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to D+bB G  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. _<u8%\  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of uPa/,"p  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen  !7 e i1  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites + AE&GU  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. X=rc3~}f  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 `,F&y{ A  
Original Article BNAguAxWo  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 1x~%Ydy  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD )e4WAlg8c  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia v7s ]  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, Y|{r vBKjf  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au *(?U  
78 McCarty et al. @4 zi] v  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Z! C`f/h9  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural ^CowJ(y(  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify F/Rng'l  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a {0NsDi>(2  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of ,!o\),N  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, k| _$R?  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ua]\xBWx  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. 9f\aoVX  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local )LXoey!aZ  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. N0y;PVAGu  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian u)q2YLK8  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. #~bU}[ {  
Assessment of cataract 9IS1.3  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after {pcf;1^t  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine |'V<>v.v  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the <GL}1W"Ay  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using )0 Y #-=.<  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 2]of SdM  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on kcq9p2zKv  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) Bo](n*i  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, i# pjv'C  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, WL IDw@fv  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than EuKrYY] g  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to X7XCZSh#A  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual _Ep{|]:gw  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, ({d,oU$>y  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. j:rs+1bc  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to Y0P}KPD  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ~cO?S2!W  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight (]zl$*k  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the N27K  
analyses. dyQ<UT  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., haEZp6Z  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in G:h;C].  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. ]HNT(w@  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman }2iKi(io*  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph P\*2c*,W;  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were WV,?Ge  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera $+!}Vtb  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 d!}jdt5%  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately &dZ.+#8r  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated UijuJ(Tle  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies  |(J ?#?  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were uusY,Dt/9  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, .swgXiRvs  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph ~u?x{[  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical DMK"Q#Vw  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) nL7S3  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to 4Rrw8Bw  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. *FLT z(T  
Assessment of risk factors 2t]! {L  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information v:J.d5  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 %`s9yRk9>E  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration e%@[d<Ta\  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, O'&X aaZV  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension qs8K jG@  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and COkLn)+0  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were 0o"<^] _|  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to X/;"CM  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants w=P <4 bdT  
and use of vitamin supplements. :hl}Z n~jt  
Data management and statistical analysis HZr/0I?  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a *{;A\sL  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, !3X%5=#L4  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or *>&N t  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at L/ICFa.G  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms ?w5nKpG#RI  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and =|{,5="  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency n nnA,  
checks were performed on the entire data set. 82@;.%  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was {;z L[AgCg  
employed for statistical analyses. z_,]fd=o  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific &_%+r5  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to rb J)RN^.  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five $85o%siS'  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates YT 03>!B  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific nu<!2xs,  
data were weighted according to the 1996 Q]?J%P.  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the , LPFb6o  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.  ?Ge*~d  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared X)R] a]1A  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated g7Q*KA+  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted W9:{pQG  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 2.&V  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. #y9K-}u  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically Ew,wNR`  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use AU?YZEAei  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The VflPNzixb!  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment N4]6LA6x6  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with PQ#-.K  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence ib=^ tK  
limits. PH4bM  
RESULTS I E sD=  
Study population 9M~$W-5  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 x 3co?  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) v5bb|o[{K  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did 3UtXxL&L`  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was Ecl7=-y  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as V'hz1roe  
a whole. m3!MHe~t  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to <^c0bY1  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The pC.P  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to CpdY)SMSL  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural q9z!g/,d/  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) &MLhCekY  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. q'-l; V|  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery LO*a>9LI  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases xfQ;5 n  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ;j\$[4W.i  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). @%85k/(  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three 4~MUc!  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence 1ucUnNkcV  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes n/Z =q?_  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% &I_!&m~  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract @!HMd{r  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract I,Y^_(JW  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall =U|SK"oO  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was v" TH[}C9D  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). -+Ji~;b  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract #`wfl9tj  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified iEO2Bil]  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated #yxYL0CcA:  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents pl/$@K?L  
as information about risk factor exposure was not SvrV5X  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 56aJE .?<  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence "2j~3aWj  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic *M5C*}dl  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 45JLx?rN_  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use HYa!$P3}[  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private A|nU _*  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, EU~'n-  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. \dbtd hT;Z  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the N=x,96CF  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having j* ja )  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract hZG{"O!2 s  
surgery were not available. ZXkAw sr  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ^el:)$  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ^jC0S[csw2  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been AIo;\35  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment k{8N@&D  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant Etk<`GRfA  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression |a3b2x,  
model. The factors that remained significantly related Yq.@7cJ  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever H[oi? {L  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been O;tn5  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors ]t<%>Z$  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate IHfqW?  
model. v]sGdZ(6-  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract dD!SgK[Jv  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with c Ix(;[U  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Su~`jRN $  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort !Zx>)V6.  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total \:S8mDI^s  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 6<R U~Gh  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) 2Ev,dWV  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) co|0s+%PBq  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) #{a<{HX  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) s,= ^V/c  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) )c_ll;%  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) sy?W\(x  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) #t*c*o  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ~f:fOrLE#  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) "k/x+%!Spc  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) r}w 9?s^rB  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) ZBWe,Xvq  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) bBf+z7iyc  
Age-standardized Gy5W;,$q  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) g$qh(Z_s  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 /WMLr5  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 0ni5:t Yy  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, [S%  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). ~a}pYLxl  
Outcomes of cataract surgery }\F>z  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior d>}%A ]  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were :>;#/<3{  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular >_".  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular b< rM3P;  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact W~qo `r  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of :zCm$@  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected a ]*^uEs  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% S70ERRk  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes @UA>6F  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 9o6y7hEQy  
P = 0.027). 8CL05:&  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 9f "*O j  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 6\bbP>ql  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract AxeWj%w@  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, >wn&+%i&  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the $]vR,E  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 a7Jr} "B  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this &sW/r::,  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four Vo\d&}Q  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these q &+GpR  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction yP@= x!$  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one lIf Our  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract qIk6S6  
surgery. :KFhryN  
DISCUSSION 3K'3Xp@A  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically c/s'&gG33z  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract au8) G_A  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes H;^6%HV1  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual A4# m&o  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and l6O2B/2j  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is R_^:<F0  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, /A>/ ]2(  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract p%?R;W`u2  
services throughout Australia. r1[0#5kJ;J  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age KT8F n+  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is {{O1 C ~  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous q3;HfZ  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye qvT9d7x  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract Gf"/fpeQx  
between studies because of different methodologies and 9;@6iv  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well Kp"o0fh<9  
as the different age structures of the study populations. D3_,2  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of m\Dbb.vBvW  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. WB= gN:?  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity UE(%R1Py  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. )37|rB E  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the `=FfzL  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. kefQH\<X  
80 McCarty et al. wp} PQw:  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort N5 g!,3  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total ba ,2.|  
(years) (%) (%) (%) :sJV klK  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) /Wt<[g#  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( rR/PnVup  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) @c5TSHSL.  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) n&&X{Rl  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) oKz Lt  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) mI}1si=$  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) uP<tP:  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) Td?a=yu:J  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) lLl^2[4k5  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 85 -00m ~  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) }ufH![|[r  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) >/ GVlXA'  
Age-standardized '`^`NI`  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) R0 AVAUG  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract um ,Zt  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. D&$%JT'3  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 !Yd7&#s  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the xV}-[W5sr'  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude qE!.C}L +  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the !3E33  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). xmsw'\  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains U TC|8  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban DavpjwSn  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than wgp{P>oBX  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 3%p^>D\  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in \%g# __\  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, $GB/}$fd&  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens <#k(g\/R  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. My vp PW  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable tY'fFz^Ho  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, BUvE~l.,|  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that __O@w.  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and m:_'r"o  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is !,WO]O v  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted `o4alK\  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement VB=$D|Ll  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We C+tB$yahO  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction H!PMb{e  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have  <m7m  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this )i|0Ubn[|  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their h0ml#A `h  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants \k&2nYVHf  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the qD!qSM  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ kMd1)6%6A  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their awu18(;J  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to &pCa{p  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 9+S$,|9  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function !W2dMD/  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Z8 eB5! $  
overall quality of life.22 Qze.1h  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually ~[ a6  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 1xBgb/+  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% FqwH:Fcr:  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated J> Z.2  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear [8%R*}  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an q# C;iK4  
opaque capsule. tleWJR8oc  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and r&rip^40  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 1RHFWK5Si  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 0)Nu  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more /Pv dP# !  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Lqa|9|!  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 %r =9,IJ  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any |&u4Q /0  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of nF1}?  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ?Z(xu~^/  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without Gg TrIF  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the 5do49H_  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated Fswr @du  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. hEhvA6f,  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem i K,^|Q8  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract \p.eY)>  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will i+ @t_pxc  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the s:zz 8oN  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 6<SX%Bc~  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well ]5a,%*f+  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes AFdBf6/" i  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. p>h&SD?b  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract M$Or|HTG  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for IeT1Jwe  
cataract extractions increases. Ihy76_OZ  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS k#"}oI{< 6  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants HDQH7Bs  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the WH lvd  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell .azA1@V|  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and ?#gYu %7DN  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient d)1Pl3+  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal B&Iy_;  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. |5g1D^b]s^  
REFERENCES <G60R^o  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. -F&*>?I  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. ><w=  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, VRA0p[  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population glUf. :]  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. ZIp"X  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens \9%RY]TK3  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated C@OY)!x!  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. I%tJLdL  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related #G\;)pT  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. kpx2e2C|  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. LgJUMR8vUO  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye ByivV2qd{  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population @f%q ,:  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: M&ec%<lM  
363–71. Y N*"q'Yz_  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. -iySU 6  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye YdF\*tZ  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 2 `nOYK  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. /2fQM_ ,P  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient -Ou@T#h"  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. b$/ 'dnx  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. X~> 2iL  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated v6*8CQ+  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. M'}iIO`L  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. [.LbX`K:  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too xAJuIR1Hi  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 'bx$}w N  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: qcR"i+b  
77–80. Ika(ip#]=  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice Yxd&h r  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ';Ew -u  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. g4NbzU[I  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest @`H47@e  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye EjFK zx  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic k+`e0Jago  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. )Y 9JP@}T  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading mrId`<L5l{  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. *Rj(~Q/t  
82 McCarty et al. *\T ]Z&E"  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & \A=:6R%Qb  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. %\QK/`krp  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 7<7 /NZ<I  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International zD%@3NA41  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. CH4 ~9mmE  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 5&N55? G6  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. GMJ</xG  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison NZ=`iA8)X  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 5V"g,]'Nd  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment `D9AtN] R  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 4;.y>~z  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the Z+]Uw   
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health W*/0[|n*  
Organization, 1997. ;!H|0sv  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, M->$ 'Zgh`  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation P_8z'pYd>  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. Tye[iJ  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. L6E8A?>5rD  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of [mJmT->  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative bUBQ  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. [d }AlG!  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. F|3iKK022  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated $bd2TVNV:  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. mf\eg`'4?  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. z-X_O32  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract d9kN @W  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and !.}ZlA  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. QFYO_$1 Y)  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. H@%Y"iIUP  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to L/sMAB  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. !0k'fYCa  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. -IF3'VG  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A ^^C@W?.z  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule m}oqs0xx  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. U'K{>"~1a  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. 4' MmT'  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health B=p6p f  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ~?#B(t  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in d$}z,~s N  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, Gi=s|vt  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract $ /p/9 -  
Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水

  
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
免费考博论坛网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交