Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
~t^
Umx"Ew 2006;
xsu9DzPf&{ 34
z?dd5.k : 880–885
`Y O(C<r- doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
|W_;L6) © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
*,& 2?E8 R!f<6l8#W Correspondence:
h?[|1.lJx( Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au hh8Grl; Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
@@JyCUd Original Article
h4Wt
oE>i Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
!]5}N^X Jambi N Garap
A:yHClmn MMed(Ophthal)
Jvc:)I1NE7 ,
{ETM > 1,2
TZ *>MySiF Sethu Sheeladevi
@A4$k
dJ2 MHM
mG"xo^1_H ,
~8s2p%~ 3
I4
W@t4bZ Garry Brian
&r
G B58 FRANZCO
fIl;qGz85 ,
}R`Rqg-W 2,4
5r`rstV BR Shamanna
6<2H 7' MD
g5
T ,
f(Y_<% 3
D"rbQXR7$ Praveen K Nirmalan
}x?F53I) MPH
Dn6U8s& 3
O&1qL) and Carmel Williams
E7t;p)x MA
GL=}Vu`(* 4
8LbwEKl 1
C,An\lsT The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
4b:|>Z- 2
$P=C7; Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
h:nybLw? Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
CZ<T@k 3
L-T,[;bl International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
N7?B"
p/ L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
x;17}KV 4
h q)1YO The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
ZEAUoC1E1 Key words:
qOwql(vX blindness
j{@6y ,
[ QiG0D_'= cataract
3 r& ,
bC/":+s& p Papua New Guinea
,~1"50 Hp@ ,
qhEv6Yxfw6 surgery
T$I_nxh[)L ,
-L1785pB85 vision impairment
%2?+:R5. .
ilA45@ I
cCe~OlXQ NTRODUCTION
j]Jgz< Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
8]ZzO(=@{ has more than five million people spread across several major
qN
$t_ and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
c$O8Rhx land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
9}(w*>_L dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
#Wk=y?sn younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
FSIiw#xzH 1
"& ,ov# Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
&mwd0%4 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
L*6'u17
y particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
1E+12{~m"i and justice, and development and management of basic
CMa6':~ health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
>f(?Mxh2 population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
0j.K?]f)h and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
rUiYR]mV There are significant and growing economic, health and education
B5b:znW2@ disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
:xd;=;q5 Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
f7Gn$E|/r; Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
dzf2`@8# full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
yvAO"43 training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
8-q^.<9 in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
oBzl=N3< have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
3H,E8>Vd One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
asT-=p_ 0. based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
~zVxprEf_ Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
.iXN~*+g and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
8Zv``t61 provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
o[|[xuTm Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
k]b*&.EY1 of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
| f#wbw in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
v}B%:1P4 some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
i"8mrWb in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
Ey6R/M)?:y service reports
;nY#
/%f 2,3
bGRt and a community assessment
Dl,QCZeM 4
K/Q"Z* ), there has
+H)'(< been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
>I5:@6
Z A
nm'l}/Ug BSTRACT
k+<945kC Purpose:
rzjVUPdnh To determine the prevalence of visually significant
$] 6u#5 cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
$=aO
*i for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
$a(-r-_Fi] Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
FDHW'OP4 outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
;KeU f(tH Methods:
ys_2?uv Using the World Health Organization Rapid
sI ,!+ Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
0;Z|:\P\= based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
PEMkx"h + 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
uuzV,q 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
*~rj!N?; acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
mScv7S~/s was examined.
qJey&_ Results:
Di9RRHn&q Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
@s5=6z]=H examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
R@e'=z[%1 prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
exRw, Nk4 acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
'Zx5+rM${} confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
b)wcGBS =
n<?U6~F&~ 1.3).
3JazQU That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
QcegT/vO acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
eJDZ|$ 5.1, 7.3, deff
KE?t?p =
5_yQI D%Sq 1.1). The latter was not associated with
JWVV?~1 gender (
)p&g!qA P
n@p]v* =
lu utyK! 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
>P6"-x,[" at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
dQ:,pe7A Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
,p2UshOmd 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
lg%fjBY prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
6 2xOh\( was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
# :+
Nr =
d0J/"< 1.3). Vision outcomes of
(leX` SN0u surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
M
T6p@b5 Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
}U]jy seeking and undergoing surgery.
bpu`'Vx Conclusion:
!z?
Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
c~|(j \FI surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
)k<cd.MX care services.
nnlj# Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
lZzW-
%K © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
7w
)?s@CD This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
oZ{,IZ45 based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
dJuy Jl$* those 50 years and older in PNG.
@f[- M
KGt: ETHODS
0nc(2Bi The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
FgdnX2s J Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
!Uiq3s`1T survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
+!).' (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
Iv6 lE:) December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
U~
X World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
lHiWzt
u Cataract Surgical Services
!ooi.Oz*Tu 5,6
`IN!#b+Eo protocol. Characterization of
z|s(D<*w cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
5OM#_.p was part of that study.
d` GN!^ As reported elsewhere,
F .S^KK 7
_'D(>e? the sample size required, using a
|q3X#s72 prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
2poo@]
M/
visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
Kebr>t8^ target population, precision of
+~n:*\ ±
tE%g)hL- 20%, with 95% confidence
y\v#qFVOZ intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
F{mUxo#T size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
re*Zs}(N\ sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
)q x;/=D security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
|GMo"[ in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
##mZ97>$ coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
Z9: Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
20I`F>-* this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
1$RJzHS to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
eipg,EI sampling strategy.
Cl'$*h Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
JuZkE9C,${ using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
[~Ky{:@)[ that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
/KvJjt'8 year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
:G>w MMv&z members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
he(K 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
p2Khfl6- from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
\me5"ZU This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
TG;[,oa required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
m 3UK`~ji cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
uZ8-? nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
* WV=X p obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
nA0%M1a A standardized survey record was completed for each
IP/%=m)\% participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
aX1b(h2 information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
7j)ky2r#
also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
Xfg3q.q the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
/a*){JQ5j for agreement between the four volunteers designated
^?RH<z to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
"dP-e The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
EMP|I^ acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
g*a+$' of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
`Pc6
G*p services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
YzjRD: done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
HL&HY)W1gf four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
<oJ?J^ smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
%SB4_ r*< with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
?PWg was also measured.
#I?Z,;DI= An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
k6M D3c cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
-&D=4,# of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
B!pz0K*uG loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
61Cc? a*_ pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
r'Wf4p^Xd was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
*-PjcF}Y reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
S[ !6Lw lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
9V1d`]tP transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
iXy1{=BDv present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
_|US`,kfc capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
(Ff}Y.4 to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
%:'G={G`QH or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
joskKik^ any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
;*Vnwt A with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
;Tr,BfV|Bf undilated pupil.
l#enbQ`-~ A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
Fc@R,9 a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
C0[U}Y/r2 any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
d eT<)'" to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
s
s%
, than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
'y;Kj opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
)KE findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
JWd[zJ[ loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
=tD*,2] contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
\4wMv[;7 study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
DAb/B eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
I+H~ 5zq. treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
U4=l`{5on treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
0]bt}rh when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
exJc[G&t( refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
]TT >3"Dw7 was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
I
Wu=z!mO present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
#epbc K determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
+o`%7r(R associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
RJ@79L*# example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
r\Y,*e be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
N_K9H1r Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
_aevaWtEx in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
nDdY~f.B about the reasons for not having surgery. The
Ztmh z_u7 responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
FDD=I\Ic of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
a
C[G_ACwc recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
>
pb}@\;: were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
+ )Qu,%2
surgery.
YCiG~y/~ Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
9JP:wE~y to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
IrL7%? detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
"b`#RohCi age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
[T_[QU:A afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
}{N#JTmjB# the case.
=h4uN, The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
LRHod1}mS entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
Eh8GqFEM of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
;GM`=M4 cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
^$P_B-C N estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
P1[.[q/-e of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
ivgX o'= 882 Garap
KX~
uE6rX et al.
Culv/ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
c9[{P~y year 2000
:;Z/$M16B 1
u W,J5! was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
{2 q"9Ox" point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
(Z>?\iNJ of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
aQ(P#n>a2 STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
T%%EWa<a test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
D,.`mX logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
wp }Q4I used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
17'd~-lE P
^ulgZ2BQ| -
(enr{1 value of
VvIUAn <
Y`22DFO 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
f`ibP6% The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
Caj H;K\ calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
vUbgSI the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
xT&/xZLT in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
p,z>:
3M
the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
[H\0
' combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
-l}"DP
_ currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
uM'n4 oH 6/60
c86?-u') =
p}==aNZK 100
XPrnQJ a
uDG>m7(}/h /(
#@YKNS[ a
T0fm6
J +
M3UC9t9] b
|a])o ), where
k {{eyC a
]Z UE ! =
V G7#C@>Z pseudophakic
z{BgAI, +
uUp>N^mmVH aphakic eyes,
0u"j^v and
0ie)$fi b
Jon3ywd1Y =
!b0A%1W; eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
;L76V$& 8
g}6M+QNj The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
\COoU
(" was determined. This considers people with operated
Z! /_H($ cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
rUV'DC?eE operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
Iw] ylp =
vfT
@;` 100(
.+8#&Uy x
g|^U?|;p +
'%|Um3);0p y
lGT[6S\as )/
Mf5*Wjz.Mc (
2sqH
>fen x
S
{XO3 +
ooa"Th< y
m(xyEU +
P_Gu~B!Y z
@GweNo`p7 ), in which
(3x2^M8 x
F`gK6
;zp =
2S@Cj{R( persons with unilateral pseudophakia
\,nhGh or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
DM)Re~* caused by cataract in the other eye,
Q'e[(^8 y
H%>cpwa[7 =
N#Nc{WU'B persons with bilateral
@&E7Pg5 previously operated cataract, and
44B9JA7u z
C91'dM =
vHymSU/J persons with bilateral
V22Br#+ cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
sU^K5oo 8
M}" KAa The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
9Pm|a~[m
operations per year per million of population, was also
1$yS Ii estimated.
t<p4H^ R
Hg(nC*#/Q ESULTS
&:C(,`~ Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
Pf<
BQ*n during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
>6zWOYd from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
/ Kj;% remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
fdKTj
=4 (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
Eo<N Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
u&Xn#fh vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
wqQrby< (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
&nn+X%m9g (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
4':U rJ+ 7
GmN~e*x>p in the
?trqe/ former, and the leading cause of the latter.
o2riy'~ For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
G8hDR^ra cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
r}XsJ$ (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
q9m-d-!) (
u6p
nO P
6Y=MW{=F <
b0Fr]oGp 0.001), illiteracy (
HN
L;s5gq P
8IihG
\ <
rt!Uix& 0.001) and unemployment
vM/D7YS: (
I/w=!Ih P
UYOR@x # <
DWar3+u&0 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
zE4TdT1y| blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
[=KA5c< P
9iQc\@eGd =
7S]akcT/ 0.6).
d"4J)+q In a multivariate model that included all variables found
Nm=\~LP90 significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
O'<cEv'B* 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
hNJubTSE+) aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
Snf1vH 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
qHQ#^jH 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
h"+|)'*n were associated with functional cataract blindness.
#i~2
C@] The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
`$,
\B previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
-&\?Q_6 (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
_3?7iH P
8'X:}O/ =
D%k]D/ 0.02), male
Q:~>$5Em5 gender (
?sBbe@OC? P
*w;=o}` =
b!Z-HL6 0.02), literacy (
QX j4cg P
>B9|;,a <
m;"i4! 0.001) and employed status
D.\s mk (
E1e#E3Yq}s P
gM<*(=x' =
|
Djgm7$* 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
z"C+r'39d= was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
ywRwi~ surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
b8@gv OB model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
BiUOjQC# status.
YQI&8~z The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
MQv2C@K9F 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
cH!w;Ub] 45.3%.
*MEDV1l_T Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
.D`""up|{ (
q{W@J0U P
T*%Q s&x; <
buRK\C 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
iS{8cN3R P
V.RG=TVS <
gt1W_C\ 0.001). Also, most
:{d?B$ of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
4$=Dq$4z 5 years ago (
Ifm|_
P
^u
u)| <
",\,lqV 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
eJB !| receive intraocular lens surgery (
lkWID P
.CClc(bO_/ <
y~ JC
SzpU 0.001). Although most
=U6%Wdth surgery was provided free (
pr2b<(Pm P
8\BCC1K =
KrhAObK 0.02), males, who were more
yB&+2 likely to have surgery (
ydCVG," P
KB$s7S"= =
S
aCa 0.02), were also more likely to
(Yzy;"iAu pay for it (
+X4O.6Mn P
x<'(b7{U0 =
Hnv{sND[ 0.03) (Table 2).
[Yx)`e As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
0W|}5(C both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
G:
f\wK[ poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
J`T1 88 Table 1.
W|K"0ab Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
EK^B=)q6:W Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
b_&;i4[ Vision impairment Blindness
q
c}r.'p Eye (presenting
SMr
]Gf. visual acuity less than 6/18)
3"O)"/"Q. Person (presenting visual
&u62@ug#} acuity less than 6/18 in the
+~O0e-d better eye)
;\@co5.= Eye (presenting visual
PiD%PBmUl acuity less than 6/60)
Ih*}1D)7 Person (presenting visual
3PB#m.N< acuity less than 6/60 in the
4Gl0h'!( better eye)
KdT1
Nb= Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
sd;J(<Ofh n
Ys@M1o %
`T H0*:aI n
bT|NZ!V %
hlPZTr=a n
U$[C>~ r %
$vNz^!zgV n
.\kcWeC\ %
h_K(8{1 n
l MCoc 'ae %
hLyD#XCFA n
=`f6@4H %
tGGv 2TCEy n
O) ks %
7 jq?zS| n
% AqUVt9} %
mzufl:-= 50–59 years 266 27.9 49 14.6 84 22.8 23 13.4 74 18.0 37 14.3 17 14.2 10 11.1
,?Pn-aC+ 60–69 years 298 31.3 93 27.8 121 32.9 50 29.1 119 29.0 67 26.0 31 25.8 18 20.0
q\Cg2[nn2 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
J /3qJst 80
K ~"J<798{ +
# Ny
years 136 14.3 74 22.1 57 15.5 42 24.4 85 20.6 60 23.3 30 25.0 28 31.1
`ReTfz;o Male 467 49.1 157 46.9 180 48.9 77 44.8 203 49.4 123 47.7 59 49.2 41 45.6
!w['@x. Female 485 50.9 178 53.1 188 51.1 95 55.2 208 50.6 135 52.3 61 50.8 49 54.4
<vx/pH)f All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
l6Hu(.Ls;j Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
>$=-0?.
© 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
;SAurG$ one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
)X{ x\
/N vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
)Lht}I ]: spectacles were not required (Table 3).
^|^ek ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
C3kxw1* was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
NvH9?Ek" cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
2Y_ `& and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
!'>(r K$ to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
Q3MG+@) S and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
f}
q4~NPn- cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
yX%T-/XJ DISCUSSION
OE87&Cl"{t The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
CW*Kdt used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
cU8Rm\? should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
s(*LV2fa Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
nU]n]gd Category 136 cataract surgeries
}
DY{> D> Male Female Aphakia
cW B
> (n = 74)
} ).rD Pseudophakia
~l$u~:4Ob (n = 60)
p2T%Zl_ Couched
L/Cp\|~ O (n = 2)
q{v:T}Q|A Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
tpe:]T/xh Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
j^ L"l;m Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
~!( (?8" Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
P" +!mSe^~ Age at the time of surgery, years, mean ± SD 61.3 ± 9.7 60.5 ± 11.6 60.8 ± 10.6 63.4 ± 10.9 52 ± 0.0
&YQ Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
yZup4#>8 Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
r[xj,eIb Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
`"CIy_m Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
#clOpyT* Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
aRSGI ja<L Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
'6l4MR$j&m Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
P:GAJ->;]> Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
oRl~x^[%[- Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
nY(>|! Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
l ;"v&? Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
9>gxJ7pY (a) 136 cataract surgeries
s Xyc _3N (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
E(J@A'cX (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
(S1c6~ Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
2'O2n]{
n % n % n %
C:S*juK Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
L%G/%*7;c Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
L?~>eT Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
FT.6
^)- Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
Co|3k:I 8 Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
Leg)q7n n % n %
P2y`d9,Q Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
K%NNw7\A Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
q-7C7q Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
5u/d r9n Reason n %
XO[S(q Never provided 20 29.9
R8[l\Y>Ec Damaged 2 3.0
Q-A:0F&{t Lost 3 4.5
s98Jh(~ Do not need 42 62.6
_ ~q!<-Z †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
CC{*'p6
pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
2~`lvx 884 Garap et al.
UB%Zq1D|t © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
T@K=
*p results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
\X3Q,\H
@ study’s results are the most systematically collected and
a1^CpeG~ objective currently available for eye care service planning.
}~W:3A{7; Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
irjOGn prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
;v#BguM 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
7rIz deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
W=E+/ZvPt to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
MP/@Mf\<E 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
QoLp$1O(y adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
-|z
]I
r in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
W4OL{p-\/ deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
s<z`<^hRe CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
<x!q!; However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
7pllzy in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
<v=$A]K Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
>m$jJlAv8 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
9f#~RY|#m much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
-JKl\ E 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
UWW^g@d4 of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
G_m $?0\ have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
t]3> X additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
ZZs@P#] will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
lr*p\vH than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
-gQtw%
`x 50 years.
kk`K)PESi The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
`w6*(t:T and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
c>|1%
}"? CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
$#z-b@s=B respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
"L0Q"t: CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
XnwVK (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
{gC?kp cataract surgery is performed on those under age
\?D~&d,a= 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
1^ijKn@6 Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
`K7UWtp who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
SeV`RUO surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
K/YXLR + there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
|EGC1x]j= been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
6`h}#@ ( 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
%A3ci[$g people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
B:>>D/O approximately 440 per million per year.
]Sey|/@D Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
eP|_ the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
}Ug O$1 (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
cq`!17"k records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
c(kYCVc hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
h]]B@~ surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
HEk{!Y equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
}Ip1|Gj year.
vn+~P9SHQ Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
Hmx
Y{KB estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
2M>`
W5 country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
@iU(4eX bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
} "&Ye Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
%us#p|Ya per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
5
FE& fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
YH&q5W,KX It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
I9<%fv PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
_h I81Lzq CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
<rFh93 of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
Mzw:c# relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
3:>hHQi other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
:m<#\!? incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
*6G@8TIh
is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
x->+wJm@s (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
J(SGa Hm@ this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
p||mR will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
qYQ
vjp fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
!R![:T\, for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
i]Bu7Fuu in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
Lf`<4 P Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
e|q~t
{=9S insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
j^/=.cD| by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
e@1A_q@. (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
TuC intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
i.^:xZ guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
?I u=os>* presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
=ui3I_*) blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
[c
XSk Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
e-%q!F(Bf (2005)
fYW9Zbov- 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
=G !]_d0 Responses by 41
/.~zk(-&h males (45.6%)
ErgWs Aw- Responses by 49
Mcq!QaO}& females (54.4%)
RRQIlI< Responses by all
U\!9dhx n % n % n %
2qQ;U?:q Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
5#y_EpL" Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
j6j4M,UI43 Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
BO8?{~i No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
QKhGEW~G Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
}
7ND]y48 None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
~SmFDg$/m Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
a!f71k
r Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
yYP>3]z Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
V(g5Gn? © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
,9MNB3 resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
l%p,m[ activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
EB@rIvUi, manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
3sW!ya-VZ would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
4TYtgP1 to wear postoperation correction because they see well
,6o tm enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
PIdGis5G refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
oX'@,(6) acuities (Table 3).
_'<FBlIN Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
L}'^FqO[IW be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
Z~}9^ (qc (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
6{0MprY transportation, were made for study participants with visually
sZ7~AJ significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
|68u4z K all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
ZE=
Yn~XM this need further investigation.
Z@%A(nZ_ Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
{wgq>cb
population, there would seem little point in raising demand
~Nf|,{[(5 and expectations through health promotion techniques until
2+b}FVOe\ such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
.g?D3$|K have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
2m} bddS cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
W$`#X services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
HLdHyK/S and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
bTZ.y.sI support team, are examples of what is possible,
qJ<l$Ig both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
$DtUTh3) is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
3N|6?'
m of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
UX<)hvKj health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
_ n1:v~ system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
x9S9%JG : training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
Plhakngj improved.
]ms+Va_/ It may be that the required cataract service improvements
;*ULrX4[ are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
%Pj} health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
)qOcx
I against which progress may be measured.
,A)Z.OWOq ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
R@/"B?`(f The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
N8x.D-=gG provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
lC,~_Yb Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
'5~l{3Lw
Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
&-X51O C Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
r y@p Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
jUgx
;= their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
i1A<0W| was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
R,=8)OI2 Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
='_3qn. Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
qDz[=6BF REFERENCES
9zrTf%mF 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
+DR{aX/ll State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
\Sv|yQUT PNG Government, 2000.
JnIG;/ 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
5,V*aP Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
rmtCCPF?0 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
! hEZV&y Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
s0/m qZ]s 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
Fp[49 areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
QD%6K=8Q 10: 13–18.
^tWSu?9 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
d6-q" 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
UQ7La 7" World Health Organization and International Agency
vv<\LN0 for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
yOvV"x] www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ NWQ7%~#k* installation_racss.htm
Gm=&[?} 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
ZrA*MN H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
h4MBw=Tz~ survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
61OlnmvE 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
;:ZD<'+N vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
,1lW`Krx Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
]n<Ba7Y 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
="%887e to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
fb^R3wd$ff Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
,HmGp 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
m39.j:BG5 services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
6"}F
KRR 80: 300–3.
kApD D[ N 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
{TMng& and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
<mTo54g Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
CWYOzqf 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
Fl{~#] 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
H_Sv,lwz;c 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
CL-?Mi=Uc 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
'.S02=/ World Health Organization and International Agency
42-T&7k for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
QyZ'%T5J www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm Q^l!cL| { 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
m]
p]J_6A WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
5xNOIOpDB 1998.
I|c?*~7* 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
!O'p{dj][ quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
e},:QL0X developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
J#iuF'%Ds 7.
VAyAXN~ 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
]; g~)z improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
/6n"$qon6 2002; 86: 543–7.
dBN: 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
ZGCp[2$ and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.