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 W!V06 .  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes + ECV|mkk  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to _sJp"4?  
unoperated cataract in Australia. ~Og'IRf  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual *+lnAxRa?  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than FHqa|4Ie  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination $Y)|&,  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography OJQ7nChMm  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who J1yy6Wq3[  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater pB h [F5  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or v #IC  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. 3zMmpeq  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne <o^mQq&  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 N@Bqe{r6j  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria Dbz\8gmY  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract %`-NWAXL  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had !f yE Hk  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 {b7P1}>-*  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber hDjsGB|Fz  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 0 l G\ QT  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 6@; w%Ea  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or >2Z:=H T  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 4VD'<`R[  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate E!C~*l]wJx  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 6aXsRhQ~  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% >x (^g~i  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone /p?h@6h@y  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an OKxPf]~4E  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision V92e#AR  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no (y=P-nm  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural Kc}FMu  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance ?v8B;="#w  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated onHUi]yYu{  
cataract. F~)xZN3=  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is G{YJ(6etZ  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced Gk'J'9*  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of X;6&:%ZL@^  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes y85GKysT  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. By:A9 s  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health `cMa Fc-y/  
services accessibility, prevalence b"/P  
INTRODUCTION rR^VW^|f  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in "<txg%j\J  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all O`rAqO0F  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate | t3_E  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be pc:~_6S  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 [1G4he%  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting RVlC8uJ;P  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is vb\UP&Ip  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in {UvZ  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists @] gP"Pp  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather u=p([ 5]  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral xBl}=M?Qu  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has X3<<f`X  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for G%Wjtrpj  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has Aum&U){yY  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 P)7SK&]r;=  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is D}&U3?g=  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the SHIK=&\~-  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract `G@]\)-!  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence at/besW  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors ,4)zn6tC  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to v0apEjT  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. :BN qr[=b  
METHODS pbl;n|  
Study population l]uF!']f  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual k-*H=km  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 OLXG0@  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to "6FZX~]s!  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. oDrfzm|[Y  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ~Yb5F YE  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen `!K(P- yB?  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites kL*  DU`  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. 9B{,q6  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 -2{NI.-Xd  
Original Article J4;w9[a$  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia !NuiVC]  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 0L S,(v4  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia ; {iX_%  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, zgI!S6q  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au *%=BcV+,  
78 McCarty et al. zogw1g&C  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural I} q2)@  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural -K eoq  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify  :tBIo7  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a #I8)|p?P  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of b"H c==`  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, f>!)y-7  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of kw{dvE\K  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. C~-x637/  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local {R H&mu  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. tg-U x  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian fIe';a  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. QOiPDu=8z  
Assessment of cataract (K xI*  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after M$_E:u&D  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine kb3>q($  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the Cm@rX A/  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 7>.d*?eao\  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and yX 9 .yq  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on " GRR,7A  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) qlSI|@CO  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, X1* f#3cm#  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, &s6;2G&L$  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than `A \,$(q+  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to '3<T~t  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual de=){.7Y  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, B7x( <!B  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. s>J\h  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to B(|*u  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the tTEw"DL_-  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight $8>kk  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the AQ%B&Q(V1  
analyses. GF GW'}w-  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., K_! R   
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in YCl&}/.pA  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. e5AZU7%.  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman h"0)g :\  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph &?[g8A  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were !;3hN$5  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera A"tE~m;"7  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 m!5MGq~  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately !78P+i  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated [][ze2+b  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies ?B+]Ex(\B,  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were d\ I6Wn  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, .oS[ DTn5S  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph Mfn^v:Q#  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical 8vkCmV  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 'yo-`nNFD  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to Tnv,$KOhs  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. P b-4$n2c  
Assessment of risk factors enGZb&  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information ' hDs.Wnu  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 2T?8{yO7  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration DHg)]FQ/  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, B&QEt[=s  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension )[ QT ?;  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and }Ug$d>\  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were q`Vk A \  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 5g%D0_e5  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants pocXQEg$]  
and use of vitamin supplements. +B[XTn,Cru  
Data management and statistical analysis C#V_Gb  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a OI_Px3) y  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, -mP2}BNM  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or ]VR79l  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at -_xTs(;|8  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms Q4Nut  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and Ei<m/v  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ~g9~D}48k'  
checks were performed on the entire data set. v .ow`MO=;  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was Uw]o9 e0S  
employed for statistical analyses. # 0d7  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 1,Es'  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to KjMwrMgC  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five R , #szTu  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates B8unF=u  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific m70AWG  
data were weighted according to the 1996 D9H%jDv  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the  '[HBKn$`  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. Y3#8]Z_"}O  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared n!sOKw  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated &1Y7Ne  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted WZn"I& Z  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the }+}Cl T  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. (0l>P]"n   
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically l*(L"]  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use } @ [!%hE  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The +U<.MVOo.  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment ~;-2eKw  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with @NiLKcL#  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Xg l %2'  
limits. &G[W$2`@  
RESULTS ++UxzUd  
Study population |z8_]o+|r1  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 eY%Ep=J  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) dKP| TRd  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did oKr= ]p  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ]T(qk  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as @Z7s3b  
a whole. ?)[=>Kp  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to B qINU  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 4uh~@Lv  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to ,Y#f0  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural APJFy@l}  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) VZe'6?#  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. >s!k"s,  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery [S-#}C?~  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases Ic^ (6  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any [w-# !X2y  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). [z*1#lj S  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three @ *uZ+$  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence &h.?~Ri  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes <[T{q |*  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%  XF>!~D  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract t\PSB  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract pc QkJ F  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall Qs?p)3qp  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was h Fan$W$  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). mVN\  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract K@oyvJ$  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified ;>fM?ae5  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated PBcb*7W  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents meXwmO  
as information about risk factor exposure was not l>hvWK[ ?I  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed P)hGe3  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence yn20*ix{  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic kw7E<a F!  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a bj_/  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use e~9g~k]s  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private eLV[U  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, (yeWArQ  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. AM#s2.@  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the p;D {?H/  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having r^ '  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract B5R7geC  
surgery were not available. Z^%HDB9^  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate /)dyAX(  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ,% .)mf  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been 7h:EU7  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 9[ o$/x}  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 5yj6MaqJ  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression _fHj8- s/  
model. The factors that remained significantly related uu>R)iTQ%S  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever /1bQ RI^\  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been )wdd"*hv  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors 3a}c'$F>_'  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate 0bSnD|#I  
model. (B?ZUXM,  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract `_]UlI_h  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with ~0}d=d5g  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 */|<5X;xIA  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort ?V(+Cc  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total "x0KiIoPk  
(years) (%) (%) (%) zH#urF6<  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) [81q 0@  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) H7meI9L  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) S&D8Rao5  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 5ci1ce  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) @%fL*^yr;C  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) 1qm*#4x  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) IABF_GwF  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) hZ "Sqm]  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) ::-*~CH)  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 6fC Hd10!  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) =j{Kxnv  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ["<'fq;PJ  
Age-standardized K}'?#a(aX=  
(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) \: B))y?}d  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 Q-1 Xgw!  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% %7?Z|'\  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, &VG  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). N:Ir63X*#  
Outcomes of cataract surgery \m:('^\6o  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior cIP%t pTW.  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were e{ *yV#Wl  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular $\M];S=CY  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular GR_caP  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact n9R0f9:*  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 4U u`1gtz  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected )CgH|z:=b  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% FPM l;0{  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes 0sB[]E|7[s  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, sk AF6n  
P = 0.027). k+Z2)j"  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity o/oLL w  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without LC\U6J't1  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ,J:Ro N_:  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, }]JHY P\  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the usC$NVdm  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 <y&&{*KW8m  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this ;|:R*(2   
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four c]/S<w<  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these %.onO0})  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction ''3I0X*!  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one cv7:5P  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract T''<yS  
surgery. n=|% H'U  
DISCUSSION T k@~w  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically i83[':  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract 0N$FIw2  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes Ok fxX&n  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual \PcnD$L  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and U3Z-1G~*r  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is <Y2$'ETD  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, 5pK _-:?  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract GR4DxlX  
services throughout Australia. yc`*zLWh  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age P,F eF'J^  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is b&dv("e 4  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous +C[g>c}d  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye b6p'%;Y/  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract QodWUbi'&  
between studies because of different methodologies and ?~!9\dek,  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well  xu%eg]  
as the different age structures of the study populations. tC5-^5[y  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of /,UnT(/k(  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ~QDM .5  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 0!7p5  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. Poa&htxe1  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the `48Ql  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. }a.j~>rq  
80 McCarty et al. l;L_A@B<  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort C4P<GtR9  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total X 8R`C0   
(years) (%) (%) (%) X2rKH$<g  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) u3GBAjPsIk  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 5j6`W?|q  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) |ns?c0rM  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) M +r!63T  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) ?s3S$Ih  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 2\QsF,@`YU  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) \7"|'fz  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) #j=yQrJ  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) v{fcQb  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 8.Y|I5l7G  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ,^97Ks ;  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) ;% B9mM#p~  
Age-standardized Vm>EF~r  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) fyA-*)oHv  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract nGkSS _X  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. OmO#} k<  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Wi'}d6c  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the X["xC3 i  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude d6YXITL)\>  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the h%Nd89//  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). A>1$?A8Q  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains '=n?^EPE3  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban \`2'W1O  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than MmR6V#@:  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, r~j [Qm"CJ  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in 7MLLx#U  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, ?<TJ}("/  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens JfIXv  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. 0lg$zi x(  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable KBmOi  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, d?2ORr|m=  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that T8x)i\<  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 'bi;Y1:  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ` 3qf}=Z`  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted A iM ukd,  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement ctZ,qg*N  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We iZ-R%-}B  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction  ?<EzILM  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have IR6W'vA  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this 6dRhK+|  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their g<W]NYm  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants zjQ746<&)i  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the g X!>ef  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ^ ` y7JXI:  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their |Ns4^2  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to 1;ttwF>G7  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change Q)DEcx-|,  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function da7"Q{f+  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in "?NDN4l*  
overall quality of life.22 Wigt TAh4  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually 'Qy6m'esW  
significant posterior capsule opacification following (p-q>@m  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% Qr$'Q7  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated fEHFlgN3Ap  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear Qn*l,Z]US  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an 7g\v (P  
opaque capsule. }?s-$@$R  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and >n"0>[:4  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, [ohLG_9  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 4YfM.~ 6  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more |[?O tv  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is u# 76w74  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 )p\`H;7*V4  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any yYP_TuNa  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of & FhJ%JK  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care zZCl]cql  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without !mlfG "FE  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the Bb/if:XS  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated [c,V=:Cq  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. Tb i?AJa}  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem $${I[2 R)  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 7{ m>W!  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will oco,sxT  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the t "VT['8  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in *K/K97  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 50_[hC&C)  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes wn[)/*(,$(  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. Nf] ?hfJ  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract $s7U |F,I  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for Y$JVxly  
cataract extractions increases. AG,><UP  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS q;e b  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants rI$NNk'A  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the \IL)~5d  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell _Raf7W  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and p<L7qwOii  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient BM!ZdoKrKt  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal u> {aF{  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. D6VdgU|  
REFERENCES p"0#G&-  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. $ar^U  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. |ke0G  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, (_pw\zk>  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population irlFB #..  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. tX^6R  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens m"!SyN}&9?  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated # xO PF9  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. EDnNS  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ZxtO.U2  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ta?NO{*  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. ()aCE^C  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye ;.4y@?B  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population T";evM66  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ST{Vi';}  
363–71. l,o'J%<%  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. iZNS? ^U  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye :)lS9<Y}  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 6xDk3   
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. 4M&$wi  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient $ W7}Igx#  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. O|t>.<T?  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. u[**,.Ecg  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated EK# 11@0%  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. !; >s.]  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. cvsH-uAp  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too o-bH3Jkb]&  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal {@2+oOuYfN  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: /xUF@%rT  
77–80. E 3 % ~!ZC  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice t"B3?<?]  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? JtO}i{A  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. CT'4.  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest  0J+WCm`  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye :fj>JF\[  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic lo!pslqsn  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ZbC$Fk,,I&  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading <}lah%4F  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. _GkLspS aU  
82 McCarty et al. BI%^7\HZ  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & I3 "6"  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. n{N0S^h  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 3: GwX4yW  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International jOT/|k  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. <-.@,HQ+  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ]r#b:W\  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. >/74u/&  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison /)kJ iV  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased <n,QSy#  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Yeg<MrS4D  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. `xx.,;S  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the [;{xiW4V]  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health D]_6OlIE#'  
Organization, 1997. {XIpH r  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, cO]w*Hti  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 2pmj*Y3"8  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. k6"(\d9o  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. R +@|#!  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 6~sU[thGW  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 8?8V;   
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. {J)%6eL?  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. s<LnUF1b  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ~~|Iw=:  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 8Tg1 >q<  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. @?e~l:g})g  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract ~ S<aIk0l  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and uDND o  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. Pk;/4jt4  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. j^#p#`m  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to EVLL,x.~:z  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 7[P-;8)tq  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. 9]Ue%%vM  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A |hj!NhBe  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule @:RoYvk$  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. kh# QT_y  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. %y9sC1 T  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health '*L6@e#U  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. Wk7E&?-:6  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in @Ol(:{<  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, LDEc}XXb  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract /0qbRk i  
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