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 >L)Xyq  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes l{vi{9n)  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to }4\>q$8'  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 6SW:'u|90  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual ZJ  u\  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ,!PNfJA2  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination F71.%p7C8"  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography 2~~Q NWN  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who /tx_I(6F?|  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ^BSMlKyB  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or EVrOu""  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. B u*ge~  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 8x[q[  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ^=FtF9v  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria E.4`aJ@>d  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract XEY((VL0  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had X{<j%PdC  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 @y{Whun~  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber  q/<.^X  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Of SYOL7o  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated pX*Oc6.0mu  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or >Ix)jSNLgo  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 7-Fh!=\f/  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate +mYD DlvI  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery hA/K>Z  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% e(,sFhR  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone  J$v0  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an ie=tM'fb  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision a$l/N{<.  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no .COY%fz  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 4JT9EKo  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance -_4U+Cfmtl  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ^kzw/. I{  
cataract. =;i@,{ ~  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 3z!\Z[  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced *U)!9DvA  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of K #}DXq  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes OGzth$7A  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. &zynfj#o  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ^$4d'  
services accessibility, prevalence JD^(L~n]  
INTRODUCTION )K4 |-<i  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ?A3pXa  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 2n2{Oy>L  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ^EPM~cEY\  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be #e((F, 1z  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 tq8B)<(]  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting [u[F6Wst  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is +FP*RNM  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in k`F$aQV9`  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 8&7LF  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather *Sm$FMWQ  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ]2T=%(*  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has Tar tV3;`  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for U+3,(O  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has + G#qS1  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 0Y,_ DU  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is j{?,nJdQ  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the {0+gPTp  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract oe}nrkmb  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence (%ra~s?  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Jtnuo]{R  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to lpQsmd#  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. >:%i,K*AM  
METHODS 6UXa 5t  
Study population rj&  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual 9->E$W  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 v|C)Q %v  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to !2s< v  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. OM*N)*  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of PsU.dv[  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 3 [: x#r  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites {|c <8  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. T%A45BE V  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 B.vg2N  
Original Article O'{UAb+-  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia Y [k%<f  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD -(V]knIF  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia fEf ",{I  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, p8o ~  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au %B5.zs]Of  
78 McCarty et al. %p6"Sg*  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural ,rVm81-2  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural -bJht  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify H6X]D"Y,  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a /_ }xTP"9  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of _\waA^ F  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, vY0C(jK  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Mk9'  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. 9r=@S  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local _Bm/v^(  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 6<jh0=$  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 5RCQ<1  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 3on]#/"1b  
Assessment of cataract F!OVx<  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after [u\E*8  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine tn!z^W  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the &.D3f"  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using F`KA^ZI  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and (]7&][  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on k?ubr) [)  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) I:l<t*  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, yx?Z&9z <  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, bE:oF9J?  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than V)#se"GV  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to |6/k2d{,(  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual .v;$sst5y  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, >MD['=J[d  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. KPO?eeT.WZ  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to `t_S uZ`V  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ??eSGQ|  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight HnU; N S3J  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the vW,dJ[N6jm  
analyses. [r,a0s  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., 'L|& qy@  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in % C ~2k?  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. T\ 7z87Q  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 2@K D '^(  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph ~/Gx~P]  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were Fm}#KE0  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera wBz?OnD/D  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 a+A^njk  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately u!I Es  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated T"7Ue  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies :lj1[q:Y>  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were I&JVY8'  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, O[ tD7 !1  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph Ip#BR!$n  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical Ia_I ~ U$  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) K.3)m]dCl  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to x'IVP[xh`A  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. y/U(v"'4U  
Assessment of risk factors b=nQi. /f  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information GIXxOea1  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ?,G CR1|4  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration ~ *:{U   
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, Ky"]L~8$  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 9 0PF)U  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and @JJ,$ ?  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were JjBG9Rp{  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to B~S"1EE[  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants  j1/.3\  
and use of vitamin supplements. VI83 3  
Data management and statistical analysis $P<T`3Jg  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a J<K- Yeph  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, P#e1?  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or uZ[7[mK}n7  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at i WCR 5c=  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms S b0p?  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and }M3f ?Jv  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ,&+"|,m  
checks were performed on the entire data set. Af *e:}}  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was Xx.4K>j+j  
employed for statistical analyses. eK<X7m^  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific lr >:S  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to .I~#o$6  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five U[l7n3Y=  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates K})=&<M0  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific f?KHp |  
data were weighted according to the 1996 ].E89_|O  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the *t_"]v-w  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. X5s.F%Np!  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared kzMul<>sl  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated 608}-J=3#  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted M84{u!>[  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ;3 N0)  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. N^G $:GC  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically uc.dtq!   
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ;m/h?Y~  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The X# 625h  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment }]dK26pX  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ;$`5L"I5$  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Se0!-NUK0  
limits. 2#<)-Cak  
RESULTS =H<I` J'  
Study population wiwAdYEQ\  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 K-_XdJ\  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) {}sF ?wZf  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did gdPPk=LD  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 6MewQ{hi  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as JJIlR{WY_  
a whole. fX ^h O+f  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to d4#CZv[g/  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The d8)ps,  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to `u<\ 4&W  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural |S0w>VH>  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) O c[F  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. Z[ N O`!<  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery ~pZ<VH;h  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases {^5LolCCH  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any v>XAzA  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). ifXGH> C  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three  Kl'u  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence tj' xjX  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes Jw 4#u5$$Z  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% ?M/H{  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract Lhts4D/V7  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract \&6^c=2=  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall +HXR ))X  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was #VvU8"u  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). < dD)>Y.  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract aPwUC:>`D  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified 'vX:)ZDi  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 2Y7u M;8  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents anzt;V.;Y  
as information about risk factor exposure was not N^TE ;BM  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed '!DS3zEeLS  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence n^t!+  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic QVR8b3T@  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a O a%ZlEUF  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 1iJaj  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private lVYrP|#  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, }0oVIr  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. 9 WO|g[Y3  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the '@ {Mq%`  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having Ncr*F^J4  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract _/5#A+ ?  
surgery were not available. b6?&h:{k  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate i",7<01  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had !de`K |  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been T^DJ/uhd  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment }{S+C[:_  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant ,<t)aZL,A;  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression ^1-Vd5g  
model. The factors that remained significantly related fZgEJsr  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever #oD;?Mi  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been @#2KmM~I  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors >pm`(zLn  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate 8)ykXx /f@  
model. ^oMdx2Ow#  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract dvu8V_U  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with +`f3_Xd  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 i sU4D  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort eL_Il.:  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Bp-e< :  
(years) (%) (%) (%) x K ;#C  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) o/hj~;(]  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) tF:AqR: (~  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 0=k  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 9UCA&n  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) QTospHf`  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) 2QgD<  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) \DcO .`L  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) MNf^ml[  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) E5yn,-GyE0  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) abw5Gz@Ag  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) wpg7xx!  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ldnKV&N  
Age-standardized 3<>DDY2bl  
(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) @77+K:9I 7  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 (SMk !b]}  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% _%u t#  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, ~;}uYJ  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). lS]6Sk Z6  
Outcomes of cataract surgery XXA.wPD-  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior +DaKP)H\:  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were 7c!#e=W@B  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 8@/MrEOW#  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular O1 !YHo  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact  =>XjChM  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of f!F5d1N  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected ZK h4:D  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% qERJEyU?  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes .{-X1tJ7  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 1p8pH$j'  
P = 0.027). \Vpv78QF;  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity ;I*N%a TK  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 5,+fM6^V  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract tRo` @eEX  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, Vha,rIi  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the w3#0kl  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 ~14|y|\/  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this 86>@.:d  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four R@#xPv4o%  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these bVzJOBe  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 6s>io%,:  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one Ta$55K0  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract KWM.e1(  
surgery. ]L2b|a3  
DISCUSSION ^CgN>-xZ?#  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically xUNq!({T  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract L={\U3 __k  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes lI~8[[$xd  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual GQ jwr(  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and _.E{>IFw  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is XpYd|BvW  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, {jv+ J L"5  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract !p76I=H%  
services throughout Australia. Kz  z/]  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age |!/+ T^u  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is C/QrkTi=  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous YQyI{  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye (5CgC <  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract w~&#:F?  
between studies because of different methodologies and m#R"~ >  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well -ssmj8:Q\|  
as the different age structures of the study populations. R NQq"c\  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of  F =a  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. s:iBl/N}  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity /n6ZN4  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. $|7=$~y  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the J"@X>n  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. Ux{0)"fj  
80 McCarty et al. +>%51#2.Q  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort G 9V2(P  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total +'+ Nr<  
(years) (%) (%) (%) N-t"CBTO  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) [La}h2gz  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( '9zKaL  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) SAj#+_db  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) jKo9y  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) GU9G5S.  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) .{ZJywE<  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) m@lUJY  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) {\NBNg(Vo  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) <RpTk*Yo^=  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) U$y wO4.  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) xf8[&?  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 7[uN;B#V  
Age-standardized Hz[1c4)'F  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) n*' :,m  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract m #G,m  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Dgc6rv#  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 N` $F>E,T%  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the Ayv: Pv@  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude w ^^l,  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the Y<kz+d,C  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). {Rb;1 eYj  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains CB,2BTtRE  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban oM^vJ3  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 3-6MGL9  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, kOdpW  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in Y2tBFeWY  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, wtfH3v  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens W8u&5#$I  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. S 1^t;{"  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable lq]8zm<\)]  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, {QmK4(k?|c  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that )F\kG e  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and ,UC|[-J  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ;@Z1y  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted {oF;ZM'r  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement Y,yU460T8  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 0%;| B  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction M #0v# {o  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have !};Ll=dz  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this Zn40NKYc  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Z+EZ</'(a  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants [Mc Hl1a  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the J}4RJ9  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ \I/"W#\SJo  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their _*[vKS A&  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to <0hVDk~  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change fhR u-  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function IG;= |  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in #K$0%0=M  
overall quality of life.22 oa5L5Zr,A  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually <;>k[P'  
significant posterior capsule opacification following |HJ`uGN<b  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% g2} aEfp!H  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated mI:D  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear OI:=>Bk  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an +!`$(  
opaque capsule. *!Gb_!98  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and @n9iOf~<  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, #a9R3-aP  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We L"?4}U:  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 6 !fq658  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is j\Fbi3H  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 B=X_c5  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 9WQ'"wy AQ  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of YY7dw:>e/  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ygQAA!&']  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without yd45y}uS;F  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the  %\B?X;(  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated G&M)n*o  
with unoperated cataract in Australia.  Spo[JQ%6  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 4`r-*Lx  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract {cw+kY]m4-  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ,d=Dicaz  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the A v/y  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in &mA{_|>  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well N$ 2Iz  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes MpIP)bdq7  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. lx82:_  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract UC00zW<Z@"  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for i.ivHV~ -  
cataract extractions increases. lgHzI(  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ;b, bHL  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants '}P$hP_d  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the +gb"} cN  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell bGB5]%v,  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and |X~vsM0  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient q&wv{  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal h&b s`  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. r`:dUCFE  
REFERENCES ;AarpUw'  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. TiI3<.a!  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. xn7bb[g;  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ]5eZLXM  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population 2|8$@*-\  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. };8PPR)\y  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens #w)D ml  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 5 |oi *b  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. /KCIb:U  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related l`AA<Rj*O-  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. K%>3ev=y.s  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. brt` oR  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye 3#c 0p790  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population D?? \H\  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ",Fqpu&M  
363–71. #TY[\$BHs  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. ]4-t*Em  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye T9Pu V  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. &0@AM_b  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. 14rX:z  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient LDq(WPI1#  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. BZWGXzOFh  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 1c03<(FCd  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated /kK:{  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. BpZ17"\z  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. p3z%Y$!Tm  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too |+(Hia,X  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal P0^7hSo  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: :s'hXo  
77–80. ,Taq~  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice rA#Ji~  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ~ 'L`RJR  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 2XGbqZj  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest =5Auk 5&  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye GjvTYg~  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic  #mcU);s  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. fE/|U|5L[  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 4Z<  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. VyL|d^'f_  
82 McCarty et al. o@g/,V $  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & [?Ub =sp  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. n32.W?9  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume z@n77 9i  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International =3Hv  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. GcYT<pwN6  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 6$^ dOJ_"  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. %!e;sL~&  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison \9t6 #8  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 2r|!:^'?W  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment "G`8>1tO_  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. lm;G8IP`  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the {l-V  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health qW6}^aa  
Organization, 1997. H;O PA8\n  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, %d\|a~p:  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation c_r&)8  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. "gPAxt  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. 1"82JN|!  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of _("&jfn  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative SAEV  "  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. Lx"a#rZ  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. @GiR~bKZ  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated E|A,NPf%I  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ;|Ja|@82  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. p3NTI/-  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract rpNe8"sh  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and i Y2%_b!5  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. d">Ya !W  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. E+&]96*Lby  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to YTc o;5/  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 0CD2o\`8  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. [i'\d}  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A IrRn@15,  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule _ 5nQe !  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. q KL_1 ~  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. lE54RX}e4  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health \?} {wh8  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. T_} \  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in QsmG(1=  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, BX),U  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract ?nFT51 t/4  
Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水

  
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
免费考博论坛网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交