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 U91 &|  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ^cYStMjpy  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to UZzNVIXA%  
unoperated cataract in Australia. J.1O/Pw!.a  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual X AQGG>  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than Ct4LkmD  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination fuq( 2&^  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography # v{Y=$L  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who -glugVq  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 5\okU"{d7  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or u3U4U K  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. x>}B#  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne a "R7JjH  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ZTN (irK  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria he"L*p*H  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract e"]"F{Q  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had TI}}1ScA'  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 G3G/ xC"  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber J0=7'@(p  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber  Do|]eD  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated ]fj-`==  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or z<hFK+j,'^  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven :pRF*^eU  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate uS~#4;R   
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery YydA6IK4  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% te i`/  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone u#1%P5r&X  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an k}GjD2m  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision ylu2R0] (  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no -OrR $w| e  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural {(4# )K2g%  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance k'Gw!p}  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated :}Ok$^5s  
cataract. B@ {&<  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is I.1D*!tz  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced WfZF~$li`  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of :$?Q D  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ~O{W;Cyh  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ?Nf 5w  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health zzJja/mp  
services accessibility, prevalence =s;M]:  
INTRODUCTION ?DPHo)w  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ~EEs} i  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all v>H=,.`0\  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate G(/D tY]  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be !77NG4B  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 =xL)$DTg)  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting 'N\&<dT>  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is o_f-GO  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in [ ny6W9  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists  @pFj9[N  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather :U'Cor H  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral )*|(i]  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has iidT~l  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for Dz;HAyPj  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has fPqr6OYz  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ab.tH$:<  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is @0NJ{  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the eg<pa'Hw  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract y 9L14  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence z-r2!^q27  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors s^hR\iY  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to tg\|?  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. )8,|-o=  
METHODS QkQ!Ep(  
Study population !wE}(0BTx  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual S,jZ3^  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 fCw*$:O  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to w7TJv4_  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 33Az$GXFsq  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ,Nm$i"Lg  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen ~h$wH{-U#  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites vB0RKk}d5  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. F@YKFk+a  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 B?bW1  
Original Article A7Po 3n%Q  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ]?+{aS-]?k  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 1q7tiMvV-  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia YJeyIYCs<  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, 2JGL;U$  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au sD;M !K_  
78 McCarty et al. 4?\:{1X=  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural h^UKT`9vt  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural C1kYl0 zR[  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify X}ma]  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a KLWn?`  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of ^x>Qf(b  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, >$WQxbwM(  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ia@'%8  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. B;>{0 s  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local W,5Hx1z R  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 1\*\?\T>_  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian "hxN!,DEZ  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. m,i,n9C->  
Assessment of cataract ^!<dgBNj  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after ~}EMk3  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine afBE{  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the }o4N<%/+  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using K_)eWf0a  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and ajR%c2G;  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on !G^L/?z3  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) . o7m!  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, J%09^5:-z  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, xsd_Uu *  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 00v&lQBW  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to |8> 3`w!  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual f=C,e/sw  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, wO ?+Nh  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. Y}#h5\  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to \PDd$syDA  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the NH$r Z7$  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight A+6 n#  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the /|#&px)G  
analyses. 4wC+S9I#E^  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., JJ;[,  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in rSXh;\MfB4  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. G!K]W:m  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman ,'[<bP'%_  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 3a.kBzus  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were !vG'J\*xc  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 64hk2a8  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 n 1!?"m!  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately /|xra8?H[  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated Neg,qOt  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies ^G6RjJxqp8  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were CPNL 94x  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, pdE3r$C  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 3p0LN'q]A  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical J,Ks0M A  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) @|Rrf*J?%  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to os/vtyP:a  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. gx%|Pgd  
Assessment of risk factors bV ZMW/w  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information Mbjvh2z  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ]Kr `9r),  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration 6R=W}q4  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 7b<yVP;{  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension I1 PuHf Qs  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and !Q#{o^{Y~  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ;3' .C~   
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 0qX3v<+[6  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants \hB5@e4i2  
and use of vitamin supplements. g]*#%Xa  
Data management and statistical analysis 3-&QRR#p  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a )E~ 79!  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 0{= `on;  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or s0PrbL% _`  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 5H ue7'LS  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms ]MxC_V+P`  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and ra o[VZ  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ;UxP Kpl  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ^k9kJ+x^S2  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was o_'p3nD  
employed for statistical analyses. 78/Zk}I ]  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific "sG=w jcw^  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to  -4cXRv]  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five / oriW;OF  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates vMS |$L  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 7(5 4/  
data were weighted according to the 1996 >k'c' 7/  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the ~m$Y$,uH  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. RRI"d~~F6  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ;A*`e$  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated v-PXZ'7~  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted ^_f+15]D  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ` eXaT8  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. QnJZr:4b  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically gntxNp[9T  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use VSSu &Q  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The PBp^|t]E>  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment hy`?E6=9+  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with K2<9mDn&  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence hK_LEwd;  
limits. oomT)gO 6*  
RESULTS m_)FC-/pSl  
Study population <UQe.K"  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ^G.B+dG@`x  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) c\Q7"!e  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did W#hj 1  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was /|D*w^ >  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as IkGfnXJ  
a whole. RE/~#k@a  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to HxIIO[h  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The O R;uqV@  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to MpF$xzh  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural * /:x sI  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 6x%h6<#xh*  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. /!3@]xz*  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery FW21 U<  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 23DiW# o'  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ;N 0~;I  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). {o.FlX  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three opc/e  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence :gep:4&u  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes rV T{90,  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% >kW@~WDMu  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract UOxkO  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract N _86t  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall i:OK8Q{VI  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was !& z(:d  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). ):b$xNn  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract d~1 gMz+)  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified @Bf%s(Uj+  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated Q+W1lv8R  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents ZHm7Isa1  
as information about risk factor exposure was not T^Ze3L]  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed d\jPdA.a=  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence F)'.g d  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic e-"nB]n^/  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a x6e}( &p*  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use WRrd'{sB  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private ucG@?@JENm  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, T<55a6NoK  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. nh!a)]c[  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the :[hgxJu+  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having L;'"A#Pa  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract =[@zF9  
surgery were not available. z6w3"9Um  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate a{qM2P(S  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had 4 :dH]  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been "3)4vuX@;c  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment o .qf _A  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant R}4So1  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression LRb{hUt=  
model. The factors that remained significantly related Ai gS!-   
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever nysUZB  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been |!"`MIw,  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors C0}IE,]  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate 37|&?||  
model. m6[0Kws&  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract O0pDd4)"  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with zY('t!u8  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 sU@nc!&Y@  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort ]2\VweV  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Db1pW=66:  
(years) (%) (%) (%) cxr=k%~}J  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) D IzH`|Y  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) 1r]Io gI  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) WzF !6n!h  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) ~R26  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) aW`Lec{.  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) '-"/ =j&d[  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) HFaj-~b  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) TG+VEL |T  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) )>`G  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) [3--(#R\}?  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) e[ /dv)J  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) :" I E  
Age-standardized eK!V );  
(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) iCcB@GlA  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 YGPy @-,E  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% thvYL.U :  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 5_z33,q2  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). LM-J !44  
Outcomes of cataract surgery bdibaN-h  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior 4W)B'+ZK8  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were cvfr)K[0  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular x\s|n{  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular yA.4G_|I  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact - qy6Un+  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of [vHv0"   
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected NCk r /#!  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% X90J!  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes \a6^LD}B  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 0;:.B j  
P = 0.027). q&/Yg,p\  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity }= 6'MjF]  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without {jho&Ai  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ,>eMG=C;g  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, oNU0 qZ5  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the I>[RqG  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 l#H#+*F  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this LK, b O|  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four .$%Soyr?,  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these bLQ ^fH4ww  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 7_mw% |m6@  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one `(f!*Ru@/z  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract )d$glI+  
surgery. ;M_o)OS3  
DISCUSSION B]Y}Hu  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically H*Kj3NgY  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract Sz^5b!  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes )YX 'N<[  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual &Ibu>di4[  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and E 2"q3_,,  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is t7m>A-I  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, DWID$w  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 72X0Tq 4  
services throughout Australia. BVr0Gk  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age +[ R/=$  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 2Ri{bWi  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous i%g#+Gw  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye t: IN,Kl4  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract Q<KvBgmT  
between studies because of different methodologies and )E,\H@A  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well >j'ZPwj^  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 5Pd"h S  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of V\{tmDE  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ,daKC  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity KGWyJ  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. o.'g]Q<}UB  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the g*F'[Z."  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. jWY$5Vq<H  
80 McCarty et al. S=nP[s  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 9:!gI|C  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total :OkT? (i  
(years) (%) (%) (%) v $7EvFS  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) Ai/b\:V9S  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( ylB7*>[  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) -CR?<A4mud  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 2Y>~k{AN%  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) kdCP  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 3 HIz9F(  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) oh KCdT~  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) %rF?dvb;?  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) f_imyzP   
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) \/SQ,*O  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) PI~1GyJr@;  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) eh,~F   
Age-standardized (^5 7UmFv]  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) sz9G3artK&  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract :KKa4=5L  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. #CnHf  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81  X!j{o  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the rx5B=M  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude DEw8*MN  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the /%I7Vc  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Y'u7 IX}  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains eVR5Xar  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban /Ux*u#  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than AWjm~D-?  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, "iM~Hy  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in (Si=m;g  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, 2qHf'  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens `$Y P<CJeq  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. ?|1Mv1C?  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable kwud?2E  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, G|m1.=DJm  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that @<@SMK)  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and kJ An4I.l  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ]O` {dnP  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 8*SP~q  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement EQe5JFR  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We ,zQOZ'^  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction @f!AkzI  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have #n  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this P( SZ68  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their O3N_\B:  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 3p*-tBOO  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the 7 yt=]1  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ D\~e&0*  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their )B!d, HKt;  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to qUo-Dq>  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change e9^2,:wLB  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function kz q29S  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in .9|u QEL  
overall quality of life.22 #*c F8NV-  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually p{=QGrxB*  
significant posterior capsule opacification following [<wbbvXR  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% X['2b78k  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated [ut#:1h^  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear [rreFSy#@  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an vtMJ@!MN;  
opaque capsule. @("}]/O V:  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and -qebQv  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, z}.D" P+  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 1Qh`6Ya f  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more A CV ek  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is -U>7 H`5  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 {6xPdUhw  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any ^GYq#q9Q  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of u8OxD  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care + #]|)V Z  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without }r2[!gGd%|  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the PM4>Th Q  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 135vZ:S  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. g]`bnZ7  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem b4 hIeBI\  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract =p&sl;PsLw  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will 1. SkIu%  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the CtT~0Y|  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in K!b8= K`  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 64D%_8#m  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes ^t78jfl  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. "E>t, D  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract |5 xzl  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for $o^e:Y , a  
cataract extractions increases. 8Z:Ezg3^  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3C"_$?y"  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants Yg6I&#f7&  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the +8UdvMN  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell \ $;~74}  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and Lh 9S8EU  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 8X~h?^Vz  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal y`b\;kd  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. ?`A9(#ySM  
REFERENCES y~p4">]  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. +a]j[#  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. GEtbs+[  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, v[D&L_   
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population XOxB (0@  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. dwp: iM  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens B+Q+0tw*i  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated hwDXm9  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. jvO3_Zt9  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related  QSmJ`Bm  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. "=ElCaP}  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. \ 522,n`  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye ss; 5C:*y  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population sVcdj|j  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: M,JA;a, _  
363–71. /=trj5h  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. XSl!T/d  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye 3q CHh  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. ~B*~'I9b*  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. g9|qbKQ:[  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient !Y|8z\ Q  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. p6[#f96^u  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. (s Jq;Z  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated Ym: {Mm=ud  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. \2Xx%SX  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 08O7F  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 4$F:NW,v:)  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal :4iU^6  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: E+Im~=m$  
77–80. iz$FcA]  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice t5n2eOy~T  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? }<.7xz|V  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. ^ePs Il1E  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest /_HwifRQ  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye }ymc5-  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic joY1(Y  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. fPOEVmj<  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading  A<2I!  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. hc6.#~i  
82 McCarty et al. ^J0zXe -d  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & &7fY_~)B  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. :cEd[Jm9  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume |GuKU!  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International C(xqvK~p  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. d b<q-u  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and _IC,9bbg  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. jT{f<P0  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 32s5-.{c/f  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased }Z"28?  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Fgsk b"k/  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. Xm%iPrl D  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the V;H d)v( j  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health l_bL,-|E8  
Organization, 1997. +g)_4fV0|  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, #NW Zk.S  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation ZGA)r0] P`  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. _ yiR h:  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. C:rRK*  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of n?zbUA#  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 3fm;r5  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. -l\~p4U  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. dFd lB `L  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated '$n:CNha  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. j?Cr31  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. g8LT7  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 5ze`IY  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and !'Pk jP  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. ;RNM   
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. Vxp$#3 ;S  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to <sgZ3*,A  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. UN-T ^  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. dNOX&$/=  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A N8,EI^W8Z  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule x1.3W j  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. }l,T~Pjb  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. T g3:VD  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health &sI,8X2a2  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. l5{(z;xM  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in f %bc64N(  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, H @_eFlT t  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract ^t\kLU  
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