加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT .3SP# mI  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes mZ0_^  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to ,,g: x  
unoperated cataract in Australia. )Ofwfypc  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 1M?S l?+j  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than j* ~z.Q|  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination l=a< =i  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography ) /z+W[t  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who >keY x<1  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 6kONuG7Yv  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or ++!0r['+ >  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. PpSQf14,  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne mAe)Hy %  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 }!WuJz"  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ;9)=~)  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract !$Arc^7r  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had Xa$tW%)  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ("=B,%F_  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber aOEW$%  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Q:]v4 /MT  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated ciN*gwI)  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or iP?lP= M  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven )<T2J0*  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate !!])~+4pP  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery LO k J  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% :ZXaJ!  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone ?u{D-by%&  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an raZ0B,;eFu  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision 9n3.Ar  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no sv#/78~|  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural KwxJ{$|xH  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance a*o k*r  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated B,A\/%<  
cataract. (U*Zz+ R   
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 1tH#QZIT  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced -n6T^vf  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of ?xo<Fv  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ?MJ5GVeH  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. L$; gf_L  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health <}AmzeHr+  
services accessibility, prevalence 62>/0_m5  
INTRODUCTION KI5099_/  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 1i$OcN?x%  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all )h;zH,DA[3  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate d6"B_,*b  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be =L}$#Y8?  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 suZ`  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting ,CnUQx0  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is W7 9.,#  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in jp-]];:aPJ  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists %(kf#[zQ  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather +,bgOq\aG  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral :,=Z)e  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has pPZ^T5-ks  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for w7h=vy n?  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has wGA%h.[M|  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 pXHeUBY.  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is F84?Mi{r2  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the zGE{Z A  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract dLTA21b#  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence CI,xp  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors =;HmU.Uek%  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to ;V3d"@R,  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ;={Z Bx  
METHODS nzORG  
Study population MEn#MT/Cz  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual JSm3ZP|GqJ  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 ]6{\`a  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to MOW {g\{ \  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. \:wLUGFl 5  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of '$n#~/#}  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen > ak53Ij$  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 1"CbuV 6  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. &c!=< <5M  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 6Pa jBEF  
Original Article %C[ ;&  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ]jzINaMav  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD c!%:f^7 g  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia <!vAqqljt  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, rXz,<^Hmj  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ? I}T[j  
78 McCarty et al. .W&rcqy  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural -~h2^Oez  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural "t"=9:_t  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify mlgdw M  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a .-N9\GlJ,d  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of "FaG5X(  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, f|FQd3o)  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of }~-)31e'`  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. =k`(!r2"#  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local M42D5|tZc  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. $zz=>BOk  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian mcDW&jwQ  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 6M$.gX G.  
Assessment of cataract ^ I,1kl~i  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after n]coqJ  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine 8N-~.p  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the h/(9AO}t  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 5'V'~Q%  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and T*h+"TmE  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on p7H*Ff`  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) !b _<_Y{l  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, 3+ i(fg_  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, o~>p=5t  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 5-mJj&0:!  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to l]v *h0!  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual `(o1&  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, U;V. +onv  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. zLh ~x  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ^*{ xTB57  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the acGmRP9g  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight m/6oQ  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ([9h.M6v  
analyses. hU=J^Gi0  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., ap6Vmp  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in m1[QD26  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. %ri4nKGS  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman zA"D0fr  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph I8Zp#'|U  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were xY~ DMcO?  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 5r+0^UAO:J  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 I Mv^ 9T:  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately [{{?e6J  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated ,jt098W  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies Bs1-UI}+  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Asn0&Ys4  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, vfbe=)}[  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph | 5L1\O8#  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical  R_N<j  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) oOL3O@)w>  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to kCC9U_dj,  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 8;!Eqyt  
Assessment of risk factors {fb~`=?  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information =Hx~]1  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 dikWk  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration .3U[@*b(  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, <bx9;1C>zd  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension @*uX[)  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and >b ["T+  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ommKf[h%i  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to r~}}o o4K  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants IP'igX  
and use of vitamin supplements. 46zaxcY<!  
Data management and statistical analysis #8z,'~\  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a :xw3b)KS  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, AIm$in`P  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or nP3GI:mjL  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at +^J-'7Vt  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms IPO[J^#Me  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and GVEWd/:X(  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency u3wC }Zo  
checks were performed on the entire data set. M?B(<j1Ri  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was pIu H*4Vz  
employed for statistical analyses. X[E k'=}  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 5(|M["KK~  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 4VNb`!e  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five :Nz?<3R0\  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates <M,H9^&#l3  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific nuQ6X5>.=  
data were weighted according to the 1996 }IN_5o((  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the c,q"}nE8w  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. t;!]z-Y>  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared hRr1#'&  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated T;4` wB8@  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted v'Vt .m&9&  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 9>Uq$B  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. `.'i V[fr  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically u5Ny=Xm  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 14D 7U/zer  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ?Hi}nsw  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment *sw-eyn(  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with N\q)LM !M  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence `\jTpDV_W  
limits. YN@6}B#1  
RESULTS VD24X  
Study population }t|Plz  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 >{m2E8U0  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) nG"n-$A?<  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did qWO]s=V!  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 1n'$Ji7  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as &xiOTkqB  
a whole. /2e%s:")h  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to *KK[(o}^J-  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The +2DE/wE]e+  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to CE#\Roi x)  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 9 g Bjxqm  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 5VR.o!h3I  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. :N@U[Wx0A  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery x(PKFn  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases QCOLC2I  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any (kIz  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).  hq<5lE^  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three !4R>O6k   
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence X JY5@I.  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes '>3`rsu  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% l'U1 01M>F  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract nr OqH  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 4\M8BRuE  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall !?n u?  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was %}C9  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). Xv0F:1  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ,"Tjpdf  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified '61i2\[lZQ  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated ~r<p@k=.#0  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents t5paY w-b  
as information about risk factor exposure was not :B ZMnCfA  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 2F1ZAl  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence u_.HPA  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic f =o4I2Y[  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a XLm@etf  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use KmQ^?Ad- C  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private :u o[&&c  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ?; [ T  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. gg[ 9u-  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the t?{B_Bf  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having ]#zZWg zv  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract _A 2Lv]vfV  
surgery were not available. W"Q!|#;l.  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate 2n|CD|V$ux  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had :p>hW!~  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been S`iR9{+&  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment "MnSJ 2  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant ^ve14mbF#.  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression VFj(M j`}G  
model. The factors that remained significantly related x<ax9{  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever |~K(F <;j  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been 6 |!NLwa  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors xWE8W m  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate rh%m;i<b  
model. g97]Y1g  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract @{d\j]Nw  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with kl}Xmw{tJ  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 R7?29?$7  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort mfom=-q3k  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total oyx^a9  
(years) (%) (%) (%)  }Ln@R~[  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) {f DTSr?/  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)  !HK^AwNY  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) xT*d/Oaw  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) g(hOg~S\E  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) < <Y}~N  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) {1-V]h.<J  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) 6'C2SihYp  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) K#mOSY;}  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) -YGbfd<wq  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 1(#;&:$`i  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) ?GT@puJS-  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) (Ddp|a"b  
Age-standardized  $_;e>*+x  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) 1Sz  A3c  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 &^".2)zU  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% !Ng=Yk>3  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, D=r))  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). OE`X<h4r  
Outcomes of cataract surgery #*%q'gyHT  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior kOL'|GgK  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Z|lU8`'5  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular Me5{_n  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular iBg3mc@OO  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact |*5 =_vF  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 2x]>l? 5b  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected (2ot5x}`j  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% M~e0lg8  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes 7cDU2l  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, f|7\DeY9U  
P = 0.027). S[3iA~)Z-  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity *iO u'  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without { P% 9  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract z G }?  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, 8`>h}Q$  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ^ |~ml Y@w  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 5@IB39  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this GG064zPq7  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four h` U?1xS  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these C (n+SY^  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction EKEjv|_)  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one $n^ MD_1!  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract <9E0iz+j  
surgery. Va,<3z%O<  
DISCUSSION 4(e59 ZgY  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically )[H{yQ  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract #/"8F O%~p  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ZUz ^!d  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 7{e{9QbJ4  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 9I1tN  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is [Vd[-  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, +4[^!q* H  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract F:*W5xX  
services throughout Australia. }I 3gU  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age {o5V7*P;_  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is FX9F"42@  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous o]nw0q?  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye S3L~~X/=  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 0ye!R   
between studies because of different methodologies and [V4{c@  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 'n<iU st  
as the different age structures of the study populations. &/Ro lIHF  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 2o>)7^9|#<  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. WL`9~S  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity G^q3Z#P  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. ?"z]A7<Hj  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the "V&+7" Q  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. LH:i| I  
80 McCarty et al. rDm 'Z>nTf  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort iCHt1VV]  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total %,hV[[@.  
(years) (%) (%) (%) >vuY+o;B  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) ^<LY4^  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 6sa"O89   
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) "B_K XL  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) QdLYCR4f  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) }E`dZW*!!  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) z5W@`=D  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) ?BhMjsy.  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) y>*xVK{D  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) W+*5"h  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) "bDs2E+W  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) !~Q2|r  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) Jk0r&t7  
Age-standardized 6i0A9SN  
(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) w,Ee>cV]a  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ^( Rvk  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. *Sh^ J+j  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Jjl`_X$CB  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the uIU5.\"s  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude %p X6QRt?  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the t#!yrQ..'G  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). k? Xc  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ^fz+41lE\  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 7)%+=@  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than hQNe;R5  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ; O<9|?  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in tTU= +*Io  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, Su 5>$  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 9_sA&2P{uV  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. moVbw`T  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ;60.l!   
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ={?v Ab:  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that ud fe  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and KN"S?i]X  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is X,8<oX1r  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted SR*wvQnOx  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 8>/Q1(q0  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We n&MG7`]N  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 76.{0 c  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have wv^rS^~  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this j PnM >=  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their NA,C Z  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants {YUIMd!Y  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the XBQ\_2>  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ {G*A.$-d  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their *)]"27^  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to P6,7]6bp  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change [Pe#kzLX  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function kX:tc   
has been shown to be associated with improvement in qz4^{  
overall quality of life.22 %7`f{|.  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually @5) 8L/[l  
significant posterior capsule opacification following $N2SfyX7  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% A~nf#(!^]  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated ~8|t*@D  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear AGA`fRVx  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an >Q,zNs  
opaque capsule. hgRVwX  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and 8 6QE /M  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 6pE :A@  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We (wRBd  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 04!(okubyp  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ! 0/z>#b  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 =R*Gk4<Y  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 2}}?'PwwT  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 3HyhEVR-#~  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care P];JKE%  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without C-P06Q]  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the NCA {H^CL  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated ;)DzC c/  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. g( 0;[#@  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem fm1X1T.  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract *.y'(tj[  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will yeD_j/  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the FYPz 4K  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in |U[y_Y\a  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well d+z[\i  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes =.m6FRsU  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. Rag iV6c  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract g"t^r3  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for m>Ux`Gp+  
cataract extractions increases. 1czG55 |  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS *)VAaGUX>  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants f==*"?6\  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the :B#EqeI  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell M|CrBJv+F  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and iV)ac\  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient +B B0wY  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal dt-K  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. H/i<_ LP  
REFERENCES cb+y9wA  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. HCc`  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. *caLN,G  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ltEF:{mLe#  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population VN|G5*  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. Xu]h$%W  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens V< -htV  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ]C)|+`XE@  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ~L){ O*Z  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related v |ifI  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. jM\ %$_/  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. Qu}N:P9l?X  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye :)LC gIQo  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population P CsK()  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18:  8bbVbP  
363–71. f M9xy \.  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. <{ # <5 8  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye KT=a(QL  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. BJIFl!w  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ]0YDb~UB  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient U2=hSzY  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. q06@SD$   
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 5E.vje{U;  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated X_!$Pk7ma  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. K_FBy  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. c*jr5 Y  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too Pd,!&  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ]Qc: Zy3  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 6iyt2q kh  
77–80. Mi;Tn;3er  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 2t.fD@  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? BHIM'24bp  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. EtPgzw[#c9  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest Mc.^s  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye vDWr|M%``l  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic \:C%> .VG  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ^75pV%<%  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 8 `yB  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. &C\=!r0j^  
82 McCarty et al. qNhH%tYQ  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & '! #On/  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. 6Uch 0xha!  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume g6HphRJ5s  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International /abmjV0  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. ;B,nzx(L  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 8Ix -i  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. EolE?g@l8  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison <|ka{=T  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased vQ?MM&6  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment mYzsT Uq  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. W9:fKP  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the yd\5Z[iEp  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health v  )wY  
Organization, 1997. 3'|Uqf8  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, r@N39O*Wq  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation &ryl$!!3H  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. Tw`F?i~  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. (CKhY~,/u  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of [a#?}((  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative }z9I`6[  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. Y^*Lh/:h  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. duZ|mT8Q==  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated .b!OZ  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. A1#4nkkc9  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. DjevX7Q  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract \UkNE5  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and n',9#I(!L  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. mM\!4Yi`7  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. &CxyP_  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to ]*kP>  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. nsr _\F\  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. n;S0fg  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A )Ta]6  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule }5fI*v  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. f//j{P[  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. )|59FOWg  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ^=-*L 3f  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. Rpa A)R,  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in eJVOVPg<,  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, ]6i_d  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract G}9bC r,  
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:
5+2=? 正确答案:7
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交