ABSTRACT
LO;6g~(1 Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
gn:&akg of cataract surgery and the factors related to
qm6 X5T
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=beki] 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
Y o\%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%
BD [<>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
ZQyX zERp achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
\*Z:w3;r Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
\"P$*y4Le services accessibility, prevalence
gRwRhA/ INTRODUCTION
!Y*O0_ Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
9u>X,2gUR Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
NW`Mc& ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
sqO$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
rEjEz+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+TPqXb 78 McCarty et al.
{QIdeB[ Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
>x${I`2w Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
?aU-Y_pMe residents. A household census was conducted to identify
UL3u2g;d eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
p:Zhg{sF resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
0fx.n the household census, basic information about age, sex,
m!:sDQn{3 country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
l6T5]$ 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
-to 3I 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$4Utd5[z' PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
jNP%BNd1f 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
Ufe@G\uyI or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
),f d, acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
~Q5
i0s% nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
=%9j8wHX Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
RU,!F99'1 intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
;r3|EA35 analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
?4 lDoP{ cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
)[5 .*g@ analyses.
~9dAoILrl A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
Eb9{ Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
9d&}CZr height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
1fU~&?&-u Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
GsC4ty Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
TS;?>J- the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
z
|i2M8 photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
3ypf_]< (Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
K"9V8x3Wg film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
x|<89o
L by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
'A9U[| by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
S$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$x,< cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
FK.Qj P: for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
uM('R;<^ the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
{-)*.l= Assessment of risk factors
~3s\Q%
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
:]^FTnO about education, employment and ethnic background.11
2q*aq% Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
Z;nUS,?om and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
s+XDtO including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
f3HleA&& and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
,]|*~dd>G duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
Q!"W)tD collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
.q9wyVi7GI determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
YR}By;Bq and use of vitamin supplements.
p) ea1j>N Data management and statistical analysis
S K7
b]J> Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
*q |3QHZ questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
&u7oa Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
Q XV8][ on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
{kp^@ a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
SebJ}P1x were entered into a computer with double data entry and
JW-!m8 reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
zaoC checks were performed on the entire data set.
H.8Vm[W SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
l9X\\uG& employed for statistical analyses.
K7N.gT*4 Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
Ps_q\R rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
, %%}d9 account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
0[T>UEI? per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
&\/b(|> were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
Om=
*b#k data were weighted according to the 1996
,dO$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
$t a whole.
epH48 )2 The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
G D$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
[&*$!M as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
=tcPYYD cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
|Z;wk& as information about risk factor exposure was not
uz4mHyS6 available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
U!a"r8u|8q in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
](0Vm_es (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
#|XEBOmsQ integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
U30)r+& measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
(?\ZN+V) of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
U>;itHW/ health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
=zA=D.D2 glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
ID+'$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
omjLQp[% 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)
rODKM-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,
`@eH4}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
<~M9nz(<