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 t}MT<Jj  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes 7|Iq4@IT  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 1^[]#N-Bu  
unoperated cataract in Australia. {UF|-VaG  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Zm(}~C29  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than V#c=O}  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination ie7TO{W  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography \lyHQ-gWhc  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who 4 XGEw9`3  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater vkW;qt}yO  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 6 \ %#=GG  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. @[n%q.|VB  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne QqcAmp  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 Yi19VU|/  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 3ZvQUH/{W  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract d ;,C[&  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 6c}nP[6|  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 s5X51#J#~  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber clM6R  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber NIC.c3  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated t3!~=U  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or <u  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven ESe$6)P  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate gpCWX z')i  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 7qdB   
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 4=|oOIhgb  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone Tb] h<S  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an msw=x0{n5  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision |;YDRI  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no |lVi* 4za%  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural =':B  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance }w)wW1&  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated t<+g yAW  
cataract. =DI/|^j{ ;  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 2JHV*/Q  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced mEV@~){  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of SqoO "(1x  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ?6:e%YT  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Wix4se1Ac  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health tCu9 D  
services accessibility, prevalence S#\Cyn2(t  
INTRODUCTION  }]j# C  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in H8!lSRq  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all '^.3}N{Fo  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate d ewN\  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be w.Go]dpK  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 T?D]]x  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting vz)zl2F5sY  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is a,[NcdG  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in {CGk9 g" `  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 9 NqZ&S  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather GUsJF;;V  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral Qy) -gax:,  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ,f[Oy:fr  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for <rNz&;m}  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has kfy|3KA3m  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 *BQy$dfE  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is 4pFoSs?\  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the iMp_1EXe  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ]#J-itO  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence VqdR  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors r7  *'s  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to qApf\o3[0  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. NQ\<~a`Eq  
METHODS Y!_e ,]GW  
Study population ,}$[;$ye  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual x]|-2t  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 2r#W#z%vS  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to fb|lWEw5h.  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. W/<C$T4  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of o,=dm@j  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 5=P*<Dnj  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites {8J+ Y}  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. g}*F"k4j  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 Uj> bWa`  
Original Article Bl v @u?  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia x=VLRh%Gvl  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD LT) G"U~  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Z=>#|pW,)  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, k54V h=p  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au 5U%a$.yr  
78 McCarty et al. Vw b6QIs  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural _w49 @9?  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural .06[*S  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify nL&[R}@W  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a i@STo7=  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of ^Euqy,8}  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, $qh?$a  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of WY" `wM  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. S%k](\7!  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local 0?8{q{ o+  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. ^jZ4tH3K  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian w&^_2<a2  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. \v[?4 [  
Assessment of cataract @If ^5s;z  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after B]|"ePj-  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine 6$*ZH *  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the gN/6%,H}  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using \-~TW4dYe  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and \dw*yZ^  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on V50FX }i  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) ?:XbZ"25pJ  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, o$+"{3svw?  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, x7 l3&;yDv  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than U4ELlxGe  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to DKxzk~sOM  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual n; fUwon  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, `8rInfV  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 0755;26Bx  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to }+Ne)B E  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the Z:(yX0U,[  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight !R.*Vn[  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the t^zmv PDK  
analyses. pk0C x  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., ow{SsX  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in kLw07&H  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. E Z}c8b  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 8V$:th('  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph U*s QYt<?g  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were m gxoM|n6  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera <p74U( V  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 F qW[L>M'  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately }t^N|I  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 5 UQbd8  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies tgPx!5U  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were |*+f N8  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, cnR.J  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph SXW8p>1Jw  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical lnk`D(>W  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 23AMrDF=N  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to V{j>09u  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. cJnAwIs_e`  
Assessment of risk factors m.}Yn,  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information K2u$1OKv  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 lStYfO:<'v  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration QKAo}1Pq  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 4t0B_o"  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension PsLMV:O9S  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ,(6U3W*bu  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were &F *L=Ng  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to _djr>C=H"  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants FOFZ/q  
and use of vitamin supplements. fJb<<6C  
Data management and statistical analysis $:#{Y;d  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a i9qn_/<c  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, !8Rsz:7^-  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or dsx'l0q 'i  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at ~qG`~/7  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms \Qh{uk[  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and q\P"AlpC!  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency nty^De%  
checks were performed on the entire data set. D]H@Sx  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was S+mZ.aFS0z  
employed for statistical analyses. E,F'k2yU  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific G\y:O9(  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 5ayM}u%\~  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five f__r " N  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates +izB(E8&{J  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific D5wy7`c  
data were weighted according to the 1996 A/XY' 3  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the hP=^JH  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. FCC9Ht8U?  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared U;Iqz1S  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated pZS0;T]W,  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted QEe\1>1"&  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 'l%b5:  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 7q>Y)*V  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically }r}$8M+1  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use h|=<I)}z  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The As$:V<Z  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment 5J d7<AO_  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with Xknp*(9  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence u!=9.3  
limits. )ZU)$dJ>V  
RESULTS #kO.'oIl  
Study population 82S?@%}#J  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 {XT3M{`rWL  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) ?-40bb  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did i+x$Y)=  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was &+@~;p 5F  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as 3#{{+5G  
a whole. ~]}V"O%,  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to Fap@cW3?8  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The \+]U1^  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to {[r}&^K15  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 2~:jg1  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) mlIX>ss|7B  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. c4]/{!4 Q  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery (8M^|z}q  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases t7A '  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any D}n&`^1X+  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). v35wlt^}  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three ?^F*M#%?  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence  tCT-cs  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes ?\_N*NEtK  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% 4>q^W$  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract ~W h} W((L  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract "qL4D4  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall {fkW0VB;  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was (C< ~:Y?%  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). J. ]~J|K  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ]1A"l!yf  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified qT`sPEs;V  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated F-!,U)  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents X!+#1NPM  
as information about risk factor exposure was not l2v4SvbX  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed "AN2 K  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence em^|E73  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic l,FK\  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a Kjbz\ ~  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 4::>Ca^{  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private nC^|83  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, K".\QF,:  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. _xgF?#  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the i^c  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having @@L@r6  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract O34'c_ fZ  
surgery were not available. R[eQ}7;+  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate = > .EDL.  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had `aY{$>$S  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been !FhK<#  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment d*%-r2K  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 9>qc1z  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression P8DT2|Z6f]  
model. The factors that remained significantly related ]h0Fv-[A  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever z/bJDSQ  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been &1hJ?uM01  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors 28l",j)S  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate !"u) `I2  
model. xNG 'UbU  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract fM jn8.  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with wH&Rjn  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 q2VQS1R`8  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort MpbH!2J  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total *&X.  
(years) (%) (%) (%) uVoM2n?D%^  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) - #]?3*NO  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) -a`EL]NX  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 7p"" 5hw  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) #pJ^w>YNy  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 7)zn[4v7qt  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) Y$3H$F.+  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) CFJ F}aW  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ^6v ob  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) ZVotIQ/Q'  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) Ij>x3L\-  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) i][7S mN  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ;u LD_1%  
Age-standardized mLM$dk3  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) -d\O{{%>.z  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 >8;Co]::kx  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% Vm]ltiTVk  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, H`4H(KWm  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).  }9fH`C/m  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 6L~@jg~0A[  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior HxJKS*H;  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were >`DbT:/<  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular &)L2a)  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular 07-S%L7Z  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact eW)(u$C|qL  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of +F ~;Q$T  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected Ee>P*7*jB  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% '2=u<a B  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes WlP #L`  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, \s Fdp!M}2  
P = 0.027). j.4oYxK!s/  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity zcItZP  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without :qy`!QPUm  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ~*-ar6  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, W;*rSK|(Sc  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the x Yr-,$/  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 94r8DkI  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this 9"R]"v3BA  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four }(O/y-  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these hNUAwTH6  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction eN{[T PPCq  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one ke|v|@  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract !c:Q+:,H  
surgery. 12Qcjj%F*  
DISCUSSION <5/r  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically qie7iE`o  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract "xZ]i)  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes "5e~19  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual rq9{m (  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and wXDF7tJh  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is RH ow%2D  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, oM-{)rvQd  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract NUb^!E"  
services throughout Australia. Jl&bWp^3  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age ,Ihuo5>/z  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is C<fWDLwYqV  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous KgVit+4u/  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye g}IdU;X$NT  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract y?<[g;MuT  
between studies because of different methodologies and j>eL&.d  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well R B.j@*  
as the different age structures of the study populations. (}O)pqZ>  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of >h<eEv/  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 2*n2!7jZ*  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity mc|T}B  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. 64s+ 0}  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ^j';4'  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. (U2G"  
80 McCarty et al. "*laY<E  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort q?8MKf[N  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total {d}-SoxH  
(years) (%) (%) (%) t2p/NIn  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 0NfO|l7P  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( jp8=>mk  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) _XXK1H x  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) \bQ|O7s  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) XZcsx  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) #1hT#YN  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) , p1 (0i  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) .`Z{ptt>  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) - c<<A.X  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 1?(BWX)7  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) eN/s W!:P|  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) M=yZ5 ~3  
Age-standardized <B`}18x  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) n#z^uq|v  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract { N)\It  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected.  =e$ #m;  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 *Q!b%DIa$  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 8o-?Y.2  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude ]~?k%Mpw  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the t)cG_+rJ  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ,EZ&n[%Ko  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains FVY,CeA.  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban <$ ?:|  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 3Xd+>'H  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 15yIPv+5  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in 07(E/A]  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, q{U -kuui  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens ^]U2Jd  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. iS=T/<|?  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ykM#EyN  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ` b\4h/~  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that cYbO)?mC_  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 5& }icS  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is T{)!>)  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted vnN_csJ#^  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 6,@M0CX  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 3\4Cg()  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction dtg Ja_  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have V >['~|  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this ?5(L.XFm  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 9&d BL0  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants %1=W#jz  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the xDQ$Ui.  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ A%GJ|h,i  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their PH7L#H^  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to ?BLOc;I&a  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change NGze: gPmO  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function JfVay I=  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Fx@ {]  
overall quality of life.22 !3b%Q</M H  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually p0tv@8C>  
significant posterior capsule opacification following ~'U;).C   
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 5sE^MS1  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated y&CUT:M6  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear i]YQq!B  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an D~y]d  
opaque capsule. }+lxj a]C  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and m!2Dk#t  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, {c1qC zM4  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We G8&'*7Bb  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more w %zw+E  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is a2 SQ:d  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 q1gf9` 0  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any g\l;>  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of ~h@tezF  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care Y/^<t'o&  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without ZX0c_Mk=  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the [s/@z*,M1  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated w=`z!x![/  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. n1t(ns|  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ]R@G5d  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract AAW7@\q.  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will 64lEB>VNm  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the NM@An2  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in f*],j  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well G|lI=Q3f  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes ;N\?]{ L  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. F4Uk+|]Bu  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract 6\;1<Sw*  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for ?U08A{ c  
cataract extractions increases. tTH%YtG  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS a1SOC=.M;  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants <&:&qn gg  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the h<;[P?z  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell A=UIN!  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and L_"(A #H:  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient lM^!^6=v0l  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal 2nkj;x{H$  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. |o zoc"'  
REFERENCES q_y,j&  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. G*i#\   
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 3C=clB9<  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, !u4Z0!Ll  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population #oJbrh9J6  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. R P:F<`DB|  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens >'-w %H/  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated OZ!$%.?l  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. &lPBqw  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related _lPl)8k  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. z[\W\g*|ri  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. zz 'dg-F  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye >!Ap/{2  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population 7t-*L}~WA  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: < [S1_2b.t  
363–71. Ukx/jNyYv  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. u1;e*ty  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye *]m kyAhi  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. LZQFj/,Jg  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. DO1 JPeIi  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient Tw`c6^%^y  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. | or 8d>,  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. K=m9H=IX~T  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ?GUz?'d  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. mEB2RLCM  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. "[Qb'9/Jc  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too iHE0N6%q  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ]]J#7L#  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: t+=12{9;f  
77–80. e;A^.\SP  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice di3 B=A>3  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? U^M@um M  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 93Mdp9v+i  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest s{(ehP.Dd  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye hmK8j l<6  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic .9T.3yQ  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. g2g`,"T  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading tWpl`HH  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. RH!SW2o<  
82 McCarty et al. 'R^iKNPs  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & vP3K7En  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. 2Ryp@c&r^  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 7d3 'CQQ4  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International $z= 0[%L  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. !+m@AQ:,  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ^4+r*YvcM  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 'eqiY Y |  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison O[; +i   
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ;!'qtw"CB  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment $np=eT)  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. a lrt*V|=  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the rqF"QU=l  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health <lFdexH"T  
Organization, 1997.   7krh4  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO,  for {  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation T$u~E1  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. s,w YlVYf!  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. VQ2Fnb4  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of f7Zf}1|  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 9/G!0uE  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. i(0hvV>'  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. $R";  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated >&1um5K  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Pw= 3PvkL  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. /tP7uVL R  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract v{.\iIg N  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and N#UXP5C(  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. 8[M* x3  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. ) \ 4 |  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to 7 W{~f?Sh  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 7 WP%J-   
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. gD6tHg>_  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A 5q Rc4d'  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule (f~gEKcB2u  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. [sj VRW-  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. +0"x|$f~  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ~ :EW>Fq%i  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. *NlpotW,f  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in .T$D^?G!D  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, m?;$;x~Dj  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract 5V@&o`!=h  
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