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: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT 9.qjEe  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes w qLY \  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to ZkZTCb`/l  
unoperated cataract in Australia. eE/E#W8  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 2-*zevPiG=  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than K7H` Yt  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 3jB5F0^r1  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography h}o7/p  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who 4<`'?  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 5&\%  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or P~ y%  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. n2$(MDdL`  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne Hki  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 -~-BQ!!(  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 2. zx  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract q;p:)Q"  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had b]X c5Dp{  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 7]w]i5  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber D@5AI ](  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Qyr^\a;k'  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Rs<li\GS  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or 8MH ZWi  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven {uQp $`  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate '<.@a"DnJ  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery H53dy*wb$  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%  *TEgV  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone %B&y^mZv*\  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an o+o'!)  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision ]\y:AkxhJ  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no 2aef[TY  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural lj{Jw.t  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance h#ogL-UU  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated pDlU*&  
cataract. 9%i|_c}  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 6tC0F=  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced C 'YL9r-G  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of U,?[x2LF  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes .""?k[f5Q  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 5.KhI<[  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health i/j DwA  
services accessibility, prevalence ev}lb+pr)_  
INTRODUCTION 8CR b6  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in \OV><|Lkh  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all MlDWK_y_&  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ]!JUiFj"uD  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ' P1I-ue  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 a^U)2{A*f  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting X,)`< >=O  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is `Ap<xT0H  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in sp=;i8Y 3  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists tVB9k xtE  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather =Oo=&vA.oc  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral Y[=X b  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 8zDLX,M-  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for xc4g`Xi  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has _Hhf.DmUAH  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 q%g!TFMg  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is U3R;'80 f  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the it Byw1/  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract 3`%]3qd}  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence %rU8^'Gu  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Q L0  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to =tP%K*Il4  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. C;mcb$@  
METHODS reBAxmt   
Study population 9L2]PU v  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual AQx:}PO  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 mE|?0mRA %  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to SauX C  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 3FD6.X>x  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of jN[P$} #b`  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen Fv| )[>z0  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites U*p; N,SjQ  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. `(2Y%L(r  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 <"GgqyRzv  
Original Article kYW>o}J|  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia >cTSX  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD bfE4.YF  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia nzcXL =^r3  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, d~0k}|>  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au uK6'TJ  
78 McCarty et al. 51sn+h<w  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural k1.h|&JJN  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural =._V$:a6o  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify A$7j B4  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a eBZ94rA]  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of Rj'Tu0l  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, J,W<vrKOcN  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of 99KW("C1F  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. 85}S8\_u  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local E',z<S  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 'PS_ |zI  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian (zmL MG(R  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 2]UwIxzR  
Assessment of cataract +$;#bw)yH  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after b_&KL_vo{|  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine p=d,kY  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the k9*6`w  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using EK%J%NY  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 3nbTK3,  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on Ai*+LSG  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) = mp"=%  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, qydRmi  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, j9 d^8)O,  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than J?$`Tn x^  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to x,fX mgE  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual ;uhpo  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, X 2Zp @q(  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ']:>Ww.S  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to \uyZl2=WWa  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the K&{ruHoKB  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight E5X#9;U8E"  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the 9zD,z+  
analyses. 6sQY)F7p  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., p;<aZ&@O  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 68()2v4X  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. hbSXa'  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman !E~czC\p6  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 8=,?B h".  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were U}<'[o V  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera u):Nq<X  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 C5^9D  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately ehV}}1>O  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated Y?4N%c_;  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies \y0]BH  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were B42qiV2/k  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, *EF`s~  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph qpX`Z Y^  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical #^9a[ZLj0  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) ,xg(F0q  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to om1D}irKT  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. =p \eh?^  
Assessment of risk factors OP98sd&T  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information 4v#A#5+O E  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 blmY=/]  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration yUX<W'-Hev  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 4Ep6vm X  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension xP5Z -eL  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and qFwAzW;"  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were xF` O ehVA  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to }3 S6TJ+  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 6G;t:[H G  
and use of vitamin supplements. xX\A& 9m  
Data management and statistical analysis x-H R[{C  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a ?dQ#% 06mn  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, V ee;&  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or 10ZL-7D#m  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 3bR 6Y[  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 1zIrU6H2;_  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and [OwrIL  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency zF_aJ+i:~  
checks were performed on the entire data set. %s#`Z [8,  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was r&O:Bt}x  
employed for statistical analyses. ~.<}/GP]_  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific z{G@t0q  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to oU)HxV   
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five Ku;8Mx{  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates IK|W^hH\8  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific W=?s-*F[~  
data were weighted according to the 1996 'sN (=CQ  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the XFcIBWS  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. m| k:wuzqK  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared /r mm@  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated D(^ |'1  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted 5wGc"JHm  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the \&1Di\eL  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. UZ3oc[#D=]  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically w@\quy:  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use A]mXV4RmI  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The uY*|bD`6&  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment '3V?M;3|K  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ]2'{W]m  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 2Uq4PCx!   
limits. _+x&[^gjP  
RESULTS 'CC;=@J  
Study population z\Y-8a.]  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 c!}f\ ]D  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) hu''"/raM  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did c=A)_Z Fg  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was *O@uF4+!1  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as Q )b*; @  
a whole. *C n `pfO  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 84$#!=v  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The  2t7Hu)V  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to Ib665H7w  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural _& qM^  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) fb||q-E  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. _LUTIqlvi  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery `:fc*n,*  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases " O,TL *$  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any y 2v69nu~q  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). qf2;yRc&  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three p|b&hgA  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence $5;RQNhXh  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes Ie%tw c  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% v<qiu>sbz}  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract 47c` ) *Hc  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract ^?3e?Q?  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall D9|?1+Kc  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was cPgz?,hE  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). ]%K 8  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract cNd2XQB9=  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified E"P5rT  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 'r5[tK}  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents Fq<;-  
as information about risk factor exposure was not `jur`^S|  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed _\P9~w `  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence Y C uuj$  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic ?OU+)kgzh  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 2_4m}T3   
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use u/% 4WgA  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private UJ'}p&E  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, kXq*Jq  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ;b""N,  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the IJ% S[>  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having *Iu .>nw  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract cN>z`x l  
surgery were not available. S|8O$9{x9q  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate .kT5 4U;{  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had {GS7J  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been p[QF3)9F  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment Q-[^!RAK?  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant &pZUe`3  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression T~k 5` ~\(  
model. The factors that remained significantly related >Hr0ScmN@"  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever Uv6#d":f;  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been a$c7d~p$I  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors k!]Tg"]JAh  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate ]FLuiC  
model. #![i {7  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract "R$ee^  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 877>=Tp |  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 T8.@ }a  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort V(3udB@ K  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total C!SB5G>OH  
(years) (%) (%) (%)  a$I; L  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) V%pdXM5  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) V #W(c_g  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) S:] w@$  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) bwo"s[w  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) S8" h9|  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) $Q|66/S^  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) \z8TYx@  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) K}O~tff  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) G%anot  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) t09,X  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) 4;|&}Ij  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) .+aSa?h_  
Age-standardized jH B,r^:'  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) lN1T\  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 =#1iio&  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% XLFJ?$)Tro  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, %@*diJ  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). jKQnox+=  
Outcomes of cataract surgery eUqsvF}l!  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior H"I|dK:  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were <H)h+?&~d  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular [m!\ZK  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular RsVba!x@  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact LtH;#Q  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of &e_M \D  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected o?^j1\^  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% $9*Xfb/  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ykl./uY'  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, )1J&tV*U  
P = 0.027). HnioB=fc  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity }RDhI1x[mk  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without E[2c`XFd8  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 1>57rx"l  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, wp.<}=|u  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the H < F6o-*  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 6!Ji-'\"  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this )"A+T&  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four zWB>;Z}  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these N\HOo-X  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction (Pc:A! }  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one E;D9S  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract 6BLw 4m=h  
surgery. <d$|~qS_  
DISCUSSION n/S 1Hae`  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically =<iK3bPkU  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract !4]w b!F  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes z~L(kf4  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual b!5W!vcK  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and \@GA;~x.b  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is @lDoMm,m'  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, `kVy1WiY  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract jzdK''CHi  
services throughout Australia. \;.\g6zX  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age *Jm y:C<>  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is o.k eM4OQ  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous LylB3BM  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye o[O-|XL_  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract lBgf ' b3$  
between studies because of different methodologies and bQr H8)  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 5|9,S  
as the different age structures of the study populations. >|/NDF=\s  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 0.~QA+BD:S  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. O3j:Y|N@F  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity ,<d[ 5;7x  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. .MXznz  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the py]m^)yc  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 0;#%KC,  
80 McCarty et al. kBS;SDl)  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort M-e!F+d{od  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total A{bt Z#k  
(years) (%) (%) (%) p&>*bF,  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 26G2. /**<  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 1y2D]h/'  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) \3-XXq  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) +?w 7Nm`  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) osoreo;V^  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) X*KQWs.  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 9TIyY`2!  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ms{:=L2$$  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) 1XSA3;ZEc  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) jr bEJ.  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) GpMKOjVm|  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) X/ gIH/  
Age-standardized y>Zvose  
(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) lM86 *g 'l  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract m4b fW  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. o@>{kzCx  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 jV]'/X<  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the MqGF~h|+  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude r(y1^S9!8  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the j Jk M:iR  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). rlT[tOVAY  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains >J_{mU  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban xphw0Es  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than ,],"tzKtE  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, O<Qa1Ow7f  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in blNE$X+0|  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, l>`N+ pZ$  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens ^h{A AS>  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. 5!$m3j_,]?  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable C7[ge&  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, >^LVj[.1  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that RIOR%~U  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 8J{I6nPF  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is L&=j O0_  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted k$UgTZ  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement E/|]xKG  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We agQzA/Xt  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 0@d)DLM?  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have [hTGWT3  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this aDFu!PLB{)  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their |7n&I`#  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants g <^Y^~+E  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the u3vBMe0v[  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ "u5Hm ^H  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their RmxgCe(2a  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to Z]DO  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change g66=3c9</6  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function nkTH#WTfR  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in /AV [g^x2  
overall quality of life.22 n"vl%!B  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually s|rlpd4y  
significant posterior capsule opacification following K]' 84!l  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% vzJ69%E_  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated hDJq:g wD  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear |7]7~ 6l  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an E pj  
opaque capsule. g \)+ LX  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and ;l> xXSB7$  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, mbxJS_P  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We kK&tB  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more P7QOlTQI  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is H `y.jSNi  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 9 tkj:8_  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any x%d+~U;$&  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of #\N?ka}!  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care j)ZvlRi,  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without ?g| K"P<1  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the %41dVnWB^4  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated mj5$ 2J  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. c+?L?s`"  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem Q1EY!AV8  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract #Z<pks2 y  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will 5MV4N[;  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the ##d\|r  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in %HSS x+2oR  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well b\NWDH7}  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes Ntr5Q IPd  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. J7$1+|"  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract qd{o64;|  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for HX\@Qws  
cataract extractions increases. ZiM#g1;  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LinARMPv  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants ~-x8@ /   
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the `%AFKmc^;  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell /{YUM~  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and g0I<Fan  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient K+2b N KZ0  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal lMAmico  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. pC(AM=RY!  
REFERENCES ,e+.Q#r*Y  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. hR b k-b  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. }Bw=2 ~  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, L]B]~Tw  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population KIn^,d0H  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. q_>DX,A  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens -aG( Yx  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated hor ok:{  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. B) &BqZ&  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related PN/2EmwtC  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. RyD2LAf)J  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. &=|W95  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye <kn#`w1U'  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population W zgzI/  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: X^%I 3  
363–71. !? ?Cxs'  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. rsBF\(3b~  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ]w%7/N0R  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. V5KAiG<d  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ERL(>)  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient Mp7 5L5  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. <<(~'$~,L  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. [=e61Z  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated )ty *_@N0  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. gb@Rx  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. r! Eo8C  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too {ZbeF#*"  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal )[9L|o5D  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: S7aSUt!  
77–80. DetBZ.  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 4}580mBc  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ++,mM7a  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 9<7Q{  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest Q C~~  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye ":]O3 D{r  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic HH^{,53%  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. +hjc~|RK  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading U{>!`RN  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. xO1d^{~^^  
82 McCarty et al. XF^c(*5  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Syp|s3u;  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Z|8f7@k{|+  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume A*E4hop[  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International Crpk q/M  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. P]y2W#Rs  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and s\7|b:y&  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. zztW7MG2lQ  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison v Z]gb$  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased &-cI|  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment =PZs'K  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. w_U5w  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the 6_XX[.%  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health <NJ7mR}  
Organization, 1997. u'32nf?  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, "9WP^[  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation D ^ &!  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. "{V,(w8Dt  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. jNIM1_JjD  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of yY"%6k,ZB  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative UBU(@T(  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. O-y"]Wrv  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. uq 6T|Zm  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated [j!0R'T  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. (c} 0Sg  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. C*78ZwZ  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 9CN / v  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and tICxAp:  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. S3J6P2P  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. "RShsJZMH  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to =riP~%_ML)  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. @DUdgPA  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. #!hpe^t  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A NF a ;  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule +f7?L]wzic  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. C>03P.s4c  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. ]{"(l(  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health .xk<7^ZD  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. >WD^)W fa  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in nQP0<_S  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, 1a)_Lko  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract , m\0IgZdz  
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:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交