加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT L m"a3 Nb  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes G$:T!  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to Z.<OtsQN  
unoperated cataract in Australia. j*<H18^G  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual &(-+?*A`E  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than N|?"=4Z?  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 0Jz'9  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography !.H< dQS  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who =K~<& l8  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater NMM0'tY~  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 7NV1w*> /  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. 7"w r8  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne (S* T{OgO  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 '@i/?rNi%N  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria \-$wY %7  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract w`&~m:R  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had F\F_">5  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 q asbK:}  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber b/HhGA0  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber W2P(!q>r]  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated ET;YAa*  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or b1JXC=*@  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 3Cmbt_WV  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate \/J>I1J  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery {fFZ%$  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% ;NQ9A &$)  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone L|pMq!@J  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an 88x_}M^Fnl  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision d"o5uo  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ~ (bY-6z  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural Q46^i7=  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance BBuI|lr  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated |`vwykhezO  
cataract. 3}R}|Ha J#  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is M|8vP53=q  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 8 p D$/  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of *g7BR`Bt]z  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes @'n0 7 5)h  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. d8D028d  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health cG!\P :re  
services accessibility, prevalence g{PEplk  
INTRODUCTION V'b$P2 ?^  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in w{F{7X$^  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all JR6r3W  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate WSEw:pln  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be Y#e,NN  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 :/A7Z<u,  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting  iYaS  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is  zSd!n  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 6W\G i>  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists [?>\]  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather px${ "K<  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral iW%~>`tT  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has G)8v~=Bv  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for S( ^HIJK  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has !i>d04u`%  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 n58yR -"  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is xovsh\s  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the +'|nsIx,  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract lrjVD(R=g  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence q6PG=9d0B  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors (kTu6t*  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to ({3Ap{Q}  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. N:q\i57x  
METHODS uH&B=w  
Study population >PzZt8e  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual Zg%tN#6y  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 _\8jnpT:  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to #w3J+U 6r  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. f(G1xw]]@Y  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of TSD7R  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen u`ry CZo#g  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites ?b:Pl{?  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. OxPl0-]t  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 @j!(at4B  
Original Article #*q]^Is"  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia TQu.jC  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 1c{m rsB  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia @t a:9wZ  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, }SC&6 B?G  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au )Q62I\  
78 McCarty et al. -uxU[E  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural pSbtm74  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural &XV9_{Hm  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify (3K3)0fy  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a /@|iI<|  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of M(nzJ  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, Pro?xY$E)  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of {Ef.wlZ  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. [|ZFei)r  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local O Bcz'f~  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. aoZ| @x  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian l;KrFJ6  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. @"` }%-b  
Assessment of cataract zt: !hM/Vt  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after z]r'8Jc  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine -Uy)=]Zae  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the \?]U*)B.r  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using h$kz3r;b,"  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and bJetqF6 n  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on Gn=b_!  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) )M.s<Y  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, ~9 .=t'  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, {QM rgyQ E  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 6`O,mpPu4G  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to iq*im$9 J  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual &RYdSXM  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, o3dqsQE%  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.  y Ne?a{  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ":$4/b6  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the r@3-vLI!u  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight f-enF)z  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the YK)m6zW5  
analyses. }yK7LooM  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., [(@K;6o  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in VKl,m ;&N  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. e&;e<6l&{  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman EL`|>/[J  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph &N^~=y^`C'  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were Cw+boB_tip  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera t|iN Sy3  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 M YF ^zheD  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately d$3rcH1  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated LG&BWs!  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies ^[7Mp  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were ML_VD*t9  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, DzGUKJh6  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 5`.CzQVb  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical J =^IS\m  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) O6hzOyNX@  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to U*[E+Uq}:N  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 0SL{J*S4[#  
Assessment of risk factors E L CNf   
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information L[Vk6e  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 \P.h;|u  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration 5!F;|*vC8  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, ,s~l; Gkj  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension ^!1!l-  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and X`D2w:  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were KyyR Hf5  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to $.jG O!  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants >1s a*Wf  
and use of vitamin supplements. eq6O6-  
Data management and statistical analysis 0#]fEi  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a (GmBv  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, wm`< +K  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or <VxA&bb7c  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at ^+m` mcsE  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms aS [[ AL  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and  _<S!tW  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency )7 p" -  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ?Y~t{5NJR  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was *I]]Ogpq=  
employed for statistical analyses. Wu][A\3D1  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific lCU clD  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to SxRJ{m~  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five J8:s=#5  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates c]9gf\WW  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific *wTX  
data were weighted according to the 1996 \}b2 oiY  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the u n v:sV#b  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. wo`.sB&T  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared d7V/#34  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated tYD8Y  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted ,l>w9?0Z  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the u2#q7}  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. E^-c,4'F  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically e4YfJd  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ? $B4'wc5  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ,Q"'q0hM=  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment `:C1Wo^<  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with V>Jr4z  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence ;u2[Ww~k  
limits. Q`bXsH  
RESULTS t!\aDkxo %  
Study population sV"tN2W@  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 E3wpC#[Q1  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) L\4rvZa  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did |Y"XxM9  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was Xq1#rK(  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as xC< )]  
a whole. Oem1=QpaC  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to @JSWqi>  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The ?,VpZ%Df2  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to F.TIdkvp  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 2[Bbdg[O  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) Ls2OnL9  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. M Q =x:p{  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery Ow-ejo  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases Dml?.-Uv<  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any pRfKlTU\  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). l4kqz.Z-g  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three azmeJpC  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence QY+{ OCB  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 44QW&qL!(  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% Fz8& Jn!  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract wPghgjF{  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract fe4/[S{a   
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall KUW )F  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was h9S f  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). -0(+a$P7e  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract *)r_Y|vg  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified x^3K=l;N  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated s,J\nbj0h  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents "% \ y$  
as information about risk factor exposure was not O0^Y1l  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed  t":^:i'M  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence M|{KQ3q:9  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic &hpznIN  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a U&kdR+dB  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use W[!bF'- 10  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 8QFRX'i  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, !H^R_GC  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. Gd&G*x  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the k<*1mS8  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having bB.nevb9p  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract K<l dl.  
surgery were not available. $I@. <J*  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate (B+zh  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had 6l?KX  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been )N ^g0 L  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment !]f:dWSLB  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant h1_KZ[X  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression ~i@Z4t j7  
model. The factors that remained significantly related 5#? HL  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever 1K$8F ~%Z  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been Se5jxV  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors g|3FJA/  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate Y6%O9b  
model. !Ys.KDL  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract my3W[3#  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with v?1xYG@1  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Oz,/y3_  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort  F_%&,"$  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total k!,&L$sG  
(years) (%) (%) (%) @xtfm.}  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) ~); 7D'[  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) F0FF:><  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ZgI1Byf  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) AA,n.;zy<  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) ]^^mJt.Iv  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) )b Ac U  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) {^ ^)bf|1'  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) `=3:*.T*  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) &<sDbN S  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) /g!', r,  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) e'zG=  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) e[7n`ka '  
Age-standardized ~O}LAzGb  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) 9q -9UC!g  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 F|XRh6j  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% y++[:M  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, i 7 f/r.  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). #yv_Eb02  
Outcomes of cataract surgery m. G}# /  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior w#5^A(NR  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Q!:J.J  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular : YU_ \EV  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular c?{&=,u2  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact [ENm(e$sI  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of z17x%jXy  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected MGd 7Ont  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% "Fu*F/KW  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes &oTUj'$  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, Ax4nx!W,   
P = 0.027). ?1Lzbou  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Tt.wY=,K  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 8M;VX3X  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract jX79N m|  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, e`fN+  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the xZ} 1dq8  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 J)iy6{0"  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this q"@Y2lhD!  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four wIIxs_2Q0c  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these j_VTa/   
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction (-tF=wR,W  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one p=vu<xXtD  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract !SAjV)  
surgery. 5"=qVmT)  
DISCUSSION L$^ya%2  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 8_6\>hW&  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract u/3 4 E=  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes sBGYgBu!a  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual fGDR<t3yiQ  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and V )CS,w  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is 3VZeUOxY\W  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, ;Z%PBMa  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract Gq_rZo(@  
services throughout Australia. [jb3lO$Xa  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age UruD&=AMK  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is OU&eswW  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous !;'#f xW[  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye i7g+8 zd8d  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract !QK ~l  
between studies because of different methodologies and #jdo54-  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well f>$Ld1  
as the different age structures of the study populations. !Z +4FwF  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of nO{@p_3mi  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. xlQl1lOX  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 2,.%]U  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. Xq "@Z  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the HF@K$RPK  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. o(iv=(o  
80 McCarty et al. .{6?%lt  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort DoV<p?U  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total jA ?tDAx`  
(years) (%) (%) (%) E]x)Qr2Ju  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) Sb_T _m  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 4 I}xygV  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) FQNw89g  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) u@!iByVAg  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) ,/ V'(\>  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) J)6A,:wt  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) Y,1s Ng  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) gemjLuf  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) }@Mx@ S  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) &&C]i~  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Ydv\ a6  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) k^A Y g!~  
Age-standardized 9T*%CI  
(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) t >89( k  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ypxqW8Xe  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. $"Oy }  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81  )]2yTG[  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the [,_M@g3  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude q?C) 5(  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the tMaJ; 4  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). UXB[3SP  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains k fx<T  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 06bl$%  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than x{io* sY-  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ?v2OoNQ   
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in lj"L Q(^  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, .rj FhSr$  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens to Ei4u)m  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. n5_r 3{  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable zOq~?>Ms6  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, >vg!<%]W ]  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that d"78w-S  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and D %LM"p  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is uK]@! gz  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted z) 5n&w S  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement yy?|q0  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We B$7m@|p!  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction q{f%U.  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have CGg:e:4  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this h~elF1dG  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their K_nN|'R-  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants bi!4I<E>k  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the 5h[u2&;G  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ UA,&0.7  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their ?9X#{p>q  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to W<2%J)N<  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change # `a-b<uz  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function #2DH_P  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ~<, \=;b/  
overall quality of life.22 fokT)nf~^8  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually v}z o v Ei  
significant posterior capsule opacification following :G^`LyOM  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% a\}|ikiE  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated (%#d._j>fZ  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear RU"w|Qu>pM  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an xOT'4v&.  
opaque capsule. ? |8&!F  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and .?I!/;=[  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, k|A!5A2  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We -&)^|Atm  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more MCh8Q|Yx4  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is dt`L}Yi  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 X3W)c&Pr  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any :m&`bq  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of yN>"r2   
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care $,aU"'D  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without 2M&4]d  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the b,Z& P|  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated vhL&az  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. )D[ypuM&  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem Ap!UX=HBb  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract (|[3/_!;v  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will !r LHPg  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the N"T8 Pt  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in Q5<vK{  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well cw5YjQ8 9  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes M`>W'<  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. i3%~Gc63  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract /GXO2zO  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for I"!gzI`Sd  
cataract extractions increases. )_Oc=/c|f  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Dq?2mXOqD  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants XB Y"7}  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the =#^dG ''*"  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell <+$S{Z.  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and -of= Lp  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient gU~)(|Nu.  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal /,>.${,;u  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. IY19G U9  
REFERENCES )KuvG:+9W  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. R:xmcUq} (  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. lC4By,1*  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, "n e'iJf_(  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population \l2 s^7G_  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. 6,)y{/ENC  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens j<KC$ [Kt  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated Imw x~eo  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. bS'r}  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related 2o$8CR;  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. !LJ.L?9qw  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. |gVO Iq  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye uJ`&hX  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population K;qZc\q  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: $Y`aS^IW  
363–71. W.|6$hRl)  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. p.9v<I%0  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ?lK!OyCkc  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. #H[ 4?4r  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. p4'"Wk8  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient o x^lI  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. h)rf6*hw  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. BFO Fes`>~  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated tFaE cP  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. <L~xR5  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. H/k W :k  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too YfwJBz D  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal [M^[61  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 9|?Lz  
77–80. 38rZ`O*D  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 5j,qAay9  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? 9.zQ<k 2  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 66<\i ltUQ  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest n2 mw@Ay!  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye :bRR(sP  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic lK,=`xe  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. + MZO%4  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading TucAs 0-bF  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. ` G=L07  
82 McCarty et al. G>,nZ/,A{  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & $xtE+EV.p  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. DRW.NL o  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume @k+G Cf  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International z8(R.TB  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. Ui |a}`c  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 3{4/7D cX  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. !@Sf>DM"  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison e#6&uFce  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased \+Rwm:lI  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment 12d}#G<q-  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. mrhp)yF  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the 2b4pOM7W  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health " T a9  
Organization, 1997. 'hlB;z|T  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, 8q~FUJhU  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 6PJJ?}P^1  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 3_o D[ ])A  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. q3x;_y^  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of [  t  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative }r~v,KDb  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. #U$YZ#B  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Ql q#Zdru  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated n~,]KdU]  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. B;z>Dd,Y_x  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. ^fE\S5P  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract V`g\ja*Y  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and *h*j%  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. ^ J#?hHz  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. +QIGR'3u  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to V6@*\+:3)  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. p|h.@do4   
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. BaWQ<T8p8  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A ?qf:_G  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule io9y; S"+  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. +,&m7L  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. zB#_:(1qK  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 6C cB-@n4  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. mP9cBLz  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in &Pu+(~'Q  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, |MTpU@`p5  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract L!bfh`  
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:
freekaobo官方微信订阅号 正确答案:考博
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交