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 LO;6g~(1  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes gn:&akg  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to qm6X5T   
unoperated cataract in Australia. X- j@#Qb  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual b"y4-KV  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ;TL>{"z`x  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination eWr2UX v$  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography mq+x=  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Z=be ki]  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater x~ E\zw  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or g~XR#vl$  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. ?&D.b$  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 32p9(HQ  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 @!*I mNMI  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria c#Qlr{ES  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract m$VCCDv  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had @CS%=tE}U  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ?>NX}~2cf  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber z,RjQTd  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber K.Y.K$NjP{  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated RBpv40n0  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Yo\%53w/  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven Y/f8rN  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate 2>g!+p Ox  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery U2 Cmf  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% B D [<>Wm  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone z8j7K'vV1  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an L-Mf{z  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision /}k?Tg/  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no TiKfIv  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural P:UR:y([  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance mOJ-M@ME  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated !?z"d  
cataract. _ Gkb[H&RZ  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is p3qKtMs0!  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 'jYKfq~_cJ  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of >+@EU)  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ZQyXzERp  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. \*Z:w3;r  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health \"P$*y4Le  
services accessibility, prevalence gR wRhA/  
INTRODUCTION !Y*O0_  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 9 u>X,2gUR  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all  NW` Mc&  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate s qO$ka{  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ~JB4s%&  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 w} U'>fj  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting HBZtg  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is h5lngw  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in tdNAR|  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists Z& bIjp  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather rEj Ez+wu  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral *LQt=~  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 1%7zCM0s  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for Er|j\(jM  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has -Zqw[2Q4  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 CIQ9dx7>  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is hmI> 7@&  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the  @4>?Y=#  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract .8XkB<[wb  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence k>#-NPU$  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Ju_(,M-Vgr  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to CL5t6D9Qi  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. |al'_s}I  
METHODS NYPjN9L  
Study population ~uuM0POo  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual VW:Voc  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 6\m'MV`R!  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to nz Klue  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. =!=DISPo  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ;MW=F9U*  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen rR(\fX!dg  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 1 Ch0O__2L  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. avd`7eH2  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 u4Z Accj  
Original Article <\L=F8[  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia p9eTrFDy?  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD $  3R5p  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia ;eP. B/N  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, tA-p!#V<k1  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au Kj+TP qXb  
78 McCarty et al. {QIdeB[  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural >x${I`2w  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural ?aU-Y_pMe  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify UL3u2g;d  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a p:Zhg{sF  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 0fx.n  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, m!:sDQn{3  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of l6 T5]$  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. #a!qJeWm0  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local q`@8  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. nb(Od,L  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian %kiPE<<x  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. N)X51;+  
Assessment of cataract <2fvEW/#v  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after s5oU  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine {y|j**NZ  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the G\ /L.T  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using  -to3I  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and \PK}4<x}  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on #mc6;TRZO  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) jn>RE   
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, k E-+#p  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, T$4Utd5[z'  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than jNP%BNd1f  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to Ufe@G\uyI  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual  ),f d,  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, ~Q5 i0s%  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. =%9j8wHX  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to RU,!F99'1  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ;r3|EA35  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight ?4lDoP{  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the )[5.*g@  
analyses. ~9dAoILrl  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., Eb9{  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 9d&}CZr  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 1fU~&?&-u  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman GsC4ty  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph TS;?>J-  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were z |i2M8  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 3ypf_]<  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 K"9V8x3Wg  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately x|<89o L  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 'A9U[|  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies S$Fq1  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were '1Q [&  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, ?\![W5uuXG  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph cY[qX/0~  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical :*s+X$x,<  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) FK.Qj P:  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to uM('R;<^  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. {-)*.l=  
Assessment of risk factors ~3s\Q%   
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information :]^FTnO  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 2q*aq%  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration Z;nUS,?om  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, s+XDtO  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension f3HleA&&  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ,]|*~dd>G  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were Q!"W)tD  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to .q9wyVi7GI  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants YR}By;Bq  
and use of vitamin supplements. p) ea1j>N  
Data management and statistical analysis S K7 b]J>  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a *q |3QHZ  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, &u7oa  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or Q XV8][  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at {kp^@  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms Seb J}P1x  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and JW-!m8  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency za oC  
checks were performed on the entire data set. H.8Vm[W  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was l9X\\uG&  
employed for statistical analyses. K7N.gT*4  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific Ps_q\R  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to ,%%}d9  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 0[T>UEI?  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates &\/b(|>  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific Om= *b#k  
data were weighted according to the 1996 ,dO$R.h  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 1_z6O!rx  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. *b >hZkObn  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared 3Ta<7tEM  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated 0{ ;[k  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted p~xrl jP$  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the =!cI@TI  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 7berkU0P  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically Y[yw8a  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use U~w g'  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The * (4TasQu  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment 2iM8V  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ^QKL}xiV:  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence qJ|n73yn  
limits. pM i w9}  
RESULTS l< y9ue=  
Study population h1 D#,  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ;|Z;YK@20  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) /@H2m\vBX  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did :~2An-V  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was hR$lX8  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as Q l $t  
a whole. epH48)2  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to GD$jP?  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The g1uqsqYt  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to F)0I7+lP  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural Qn7l-:`?  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) .=>T yq  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 4R U1tWQ%  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery :);]E-ch  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 5 g- apod  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any !j(KbAhWZ  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). %;0w2W  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three tH:K6^oR  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence P#H#@ :/3  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes r<oI4px  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% c= 2e?  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract /S;o2\  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract a{h(BI^~  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall TKc&yAK  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was er5}=cFZ  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). t.pg;#  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract Q:~w;I  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified [ &*$!M  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated =tcPYYD  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents |Z;w k&  
as information about risk factor exposure was not uz4mHyS6  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed U!a"r8u|8q  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence ](0 Vm_es  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic #|XEBOmsQ  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a U30)r+&  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use (?\ZN+V)  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private U>;itHW/  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, =zA=D.D2  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ID+'$u &  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the d L%E0o  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having +lha^){  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract z%/ww 7H  
surgery were not available. <(p1 j0_Q  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate vB4cdW 2#3  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had H5RHA^p|  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been ~vl:Tb  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment g&0GO:F`  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant uW nS<O  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression }2c}y7B,_  
model. The factors that remained significantly related , D1[}Lr=K  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever ^YIOS]d>8#  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been bOz\-=au  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Ok`U*j  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate "}HQ)54&  
model. 3+|6])Hi1  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract <Ab:yD`K!  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with o mjLQp[%  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Na~_=3+a  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort zRJ y3/>  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total oNU* q .Q  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 17i^|&J6}:  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) 5nj~RUK  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) {H+?DMh  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) xRY5[=97  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) S-/ #3  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) R$@.{d &:w  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) H);'\]_'x  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) }[DAk~  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) *tO<wp&  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) rOD KM-7+  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) `P5"5N\h  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) !xc7~D@om(  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) |K_B{v .   
Age-standardized %xfy\of+Nk  
(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) H\k5B_3OU  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 YiCDV(prT  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% S }n;..{  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, `@e H4}L*  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). !:t9{z{Ixg  
Outcomes of cataract surgery vvM)Rb,  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior =R'v]SXj  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were R,\ r{@yrz  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ZH(.| NaH  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular tAA7  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact cMl%)j-  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of E%^28}dN  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected }SV3PdE  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% 2jW>uk 4/i  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes RF)B4D-W  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, [j? <9  
P = 0.027). lz(,;I'x  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity c Vn+~m_%  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without +*J4q5;E[?  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract OkZ!ZS h  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, \`zG`f  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ]uvbQ.l_t  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 }BJ1#<  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this :6?&FzD`  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four u mlZ(??.  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these <~M9 nz(<  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction v$G*TR<2  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one SSLs hY~d  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract a{*'pY(R0$  
surgery. DH9?2)aR  
DISCUSSION 9Nu#&_2R  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically *'YNRM\}  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract [\9(@Bx  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes uS#Cb+*F  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual :EwA$`/  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and oRThJB  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is `_U0>Bfg;  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, +g6j =%  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract \a2oM$PX  
services throughout Australia. Z 034wn\N  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age &NjZD4m`=  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ~|{)h^]@  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous = )l:^+q  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye {2k< k(,  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract bC>>^?U1m  
between studies because of different methodologies and ~wf~b zs  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well jjwMvf.R  
as the different age structures of the study populations. Usf"K*A  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 06 Esc^D  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. p:<gFZb  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity <Mn7`i  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. uM)9b*Vbo  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the |z|)r"*\4  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. Qv0>Pf  
80 McCarty et al. iC|6roO!jk  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort mGpkM?Y"  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Rc:cVK  
(years) (%) (%) (%) JeTrMa2  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) @z$pPo0fW  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( oj(A`[  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) 4R*<WdT(  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 6 ,pZRc  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 1Q&WoJLfR  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) gvc' $9%  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) @t; O"q'|  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ^ ,Y~M_=  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) ?V5Pt s  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) (ln  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Fe& n,  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 1_j<%1{sZ  
Age-standardized uWR,6\_jY  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) mWN1Q<vn,l  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 1YIux,2\  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Y6f+__O  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 {GX &)c4  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the @u"kX2>Eq  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude SD|4ybK>d  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the >d27[%  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ^Z-. [Y  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains iB}LnC:  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban > G4HZE  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than Z}LOy^TL  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, XMeL^|D  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in *2" bG1`  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, mV**9-"  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens iJdrY 6qd  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. Y>78h2AU  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable *3.yumcv{L  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 75\RG+kQ  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that t-eKruj+  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and cYq']$]  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is + 4V1>e+  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted ;"d,~nLn  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement {FV,j.D  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We I8<Il ^  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction &prdlh=UE  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have (<]\,pP0_  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this #RR:3ZP ZC  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Xb(CH#*{z  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 1EC-e|M.  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the t-*VsPy  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ JAGi""3HG  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 1R'u v4e  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to mHK@(D7X  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change T@K7DkP@  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function nV!2Dfd  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in  D rF  
overall quality of life.22 VZT6;1TD$8  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually (TT3(|v  
significant posterior capsule opacification following ULp)T`P  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% ; =5@h!@R  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated it qQ)\W  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear k%EWkM)?  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an ;,v!7   
opaque capsule. (l\a'3a.  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and >:w?qEaE  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, *A~($ZtL  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We P1(8U%   
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more K(-G: |  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is <u6c2!I{  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 .@y{)/  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 3c01uObTL  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of ljN zYg~-  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care R<0Fy=z  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without X HWh'G9  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the r/UYC"K3  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated th5,HO~  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. |$YyjY K  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 4fu'QZ(}  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract * <B)Z  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will *D\0.K,o  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the pwa.q  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in wY' "ab  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well /yLzDCKn  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes p@#]mVJ>9  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. IM@"AD52a  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract uK$=3[;U/!  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for u8 |@|t  
cataract extractions increases. }$^]dn@  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS =Nw2;TkB[  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants +#0~:&!9  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the aL88E  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell +T-@5 v [  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and /rqqC(1  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient KA `0g=  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal D0f*eSXE{  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 4S'[\ZJO  
REFERENCES cZ^wQ5=  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. UMT\Q6p  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. /j11,O?72  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, f(!E!\&n^  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population h5x*NM1Ih  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. }I\-HP8!gv  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens Ah*wQow  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ]Qd{ '}+  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. it~Z|$  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related 3u*82s\8T  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Bw6L;Vu  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. \N?7WQ  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye 2%5?F n=  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population Tj&'KF8?L  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: n"iNKR>nW  
363–71. NaF(\j  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. o!=WFAi[pX  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye TMqY4;UeL  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. %Z7%jma  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. 3524m#4&@  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient Vg{Zv4+t  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis.   La9r  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. BMpF02Y|4  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated .9OFryo  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. VRtO; F  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. gJh}CrU-  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too J,(7.+`~#  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ck$M(^)l  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 8aZ$5^z  
77–80. Ny^'IUu  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice qU-!7=}7  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? doM?8C#`  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. =*O=E@]  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest Tm_8<$ 7  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye AWT"Y4Ie  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic #uKWuGz]  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. (ND%}  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading +ubnx{VC  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. (sCAR=5v\  
82 McCarty et al. @VK6JjIq  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & @1bH}QS  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. L M /Ga  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume aMJ;bQD  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International *i k/p  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. QPs:RhV7  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and u-szt ?O|  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 41yOXy ;~l  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 7 @l<? (  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased .6m_>Y6  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment k>5O`Y:  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. / M@ PO"  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the zCV7%,H~  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health * t!r@k  
Organization, 1997. {G*OR,HN  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, !` 26\@1  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation Jhy(x1%  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 6(KmA-!b(O  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. IzUo0D*@  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of jg_n7  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative <3Gqv9Y&  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. #SnvV  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. _u5dC   
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated y LM"+.?pL  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. u|fXP)>.  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. kg>>D  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 2"&) W dm  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and -^SA8y  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. &tE.6^F  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. f/y`  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to #/ "+  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. lddp^ #f  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. GwLFL.Ke  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A YRcps0Dx9  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule DtF}Qv A  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. `ifiL   
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. ;t(f1rPyE  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health .C bGDZ  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. fly,-$K>LO  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in `xz&Scil  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, tju|UhP3  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract z`U Ukl}T  
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