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 5  FE&  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes 8 q>  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to oS~;>]W  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 3a'#Z4Z-  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 4Ik'beZqK  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than Fd<eh(g9P  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination Y8h 96  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography AwZz}J+  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ?XV3Y3  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater gfKv$~  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or I]%Kd('  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. OlgM7Vrl  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne ^v+p@k  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ^b4i9n,t1  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ?Iu=os>*  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 5}b) W>3@`  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had lq mr`\@)  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 hVl@7B~  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber h^,av^lg^  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber @1i<= r  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 7EVB|gTp  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or '2UQN7@d  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven p=\Q7<Z6d,  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate k9;t3-P  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery zN=s]b=/  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% c|K:oi,z  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone Xkk 8#Y":  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an B4 5#-V  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision xdVsbW )L2  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no i5|)|x3  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 0M?zotv0#  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance F%.UpV,  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated s< Fp17  
cataract. ~Orz<%k.  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is bcT'!:  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced c|Z6p{)V  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of 'ka$@,s:  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes }0f~hL24  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 6G}4KGQc  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health =pTTXo  
services accessibility, prevalence _xy[\X;9  
INTRODUCTION gdg``U;)p  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in -%Rbd0gVH\  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all ~)zxIO!  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate TQPrOs?  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be LFZ*mRiuKE  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 a7=lZZ ?  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting H/.UDz  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is -F 9 xPw  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in {[hgSVN ;  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 1Dhu 5ht  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather Mz86bb^J  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral &pR 8sySu  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has l?YO!$  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for l2YA/9.  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has mNEh\4ai  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 nLC5FA7<  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is 1o_6WU  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the ^~6gkS }  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract d @ l  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence `M. I.Z_  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors +@H{H2J4  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to lN0u1)'2  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ]!N=Z }LD  
METHODS |[>yJXxEL@  
Study population @; I9e  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual g!o2vTt5  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 EJQT\c  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to W-Vc6cq  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. TJ_6:;4,|_  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of Mn<s9ITS-  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen s&<76kwl  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites <`NsX 6t  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. Cud!JpL  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 m~fDDQs  
Original Article mEkYT  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia };EB  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 4 12E7   
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia ^U96p0H"T  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, zr_L V_e  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au G007[|  
78 McCarty et al. OdL/%Zp}  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural r4fg!]J ;  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural [TFp2B~)#  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify j]]5&u/l  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a mV)t  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of t~nW&]E  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, \pTv;(  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ~l{Qz0&  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. B., BP  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local YI> xxWA  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. rc~)%M<[2  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian g)D@4RM  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. Ggst s  
Assessment of cataract CdPQhv)m  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after VM\\.L  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine vv<\LN0  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the  yOvV"x]  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using \u(Gj]B#"  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and T4gfQ6#  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on ;C , g6{  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) 8ph1xQ'  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, -U?%A:,a|  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 0Js5 ' 9}H  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than Gl45HyY_  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to aRI.&3-  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual $=  2[Q  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, 7.g,&s%q  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. S1'?"zAmd  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to _v,Wl/YAp  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the >r,z^]-  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight ) hoVB  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the zcH"Kh&  
analyses. yv>uzb`N  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., T?=]&9Y'  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in B> \q!dX3  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. DW:\6k  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman TeR bW  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph ?:l:fS0:{  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were 0JR)-*  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera V$Oj@vI  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 .W2w/RayC  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately [C~N#S[]  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated VsK8:[Al  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies /~fu,2=7  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were k*F9&-rtN  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, -y?ve od#  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph !O'p{dj][  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical mRGr+m  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) *p0n^XZ% ?  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to pI>GusXg  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. <4/q5*&  
Assessment of risk factors H/8u?OC  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information d& v 7l  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 O(.eHZ=  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration UX|3LpFX&I  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 3!#FG0Z   
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension M;KeY[u  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and Ip8:~Fl]  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were G2@'S&2@s  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to CR#-!_=4  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants H&k&mRi  
and use of vitamin supplements. 0X yPG  
Data management and statistical analysis 92b}N|u  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a Jiru ~Vo+  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, Cyg(~7]  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or wp4  .~E  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at .O+,1&D5  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms [+}0K{(O=  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 37M,Os1(  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ]Al)>  
checks were performed on the entire data set. [?2?7>D8  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was ;vpq0 t`  
employed for statistical analyses. %)&Tr`   
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific g(Oor6Pp  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to /&c>*4)  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five ,eqR I>,\  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates X1V~.k vt)  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific " Z dI~  
data were weighted according to the 1996 7 VYhRC-  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 7c@5tCcC-  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. Q yQ[H  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared C}9|e?R[Rz  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated n+vv %  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted y4&x`|tv  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the moMNd(p  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. `\=~ $&vjC  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically %[o($a$  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use !y2yS/  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The <v\x<ul 6  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment zMO xJ   
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with #N y+6XM  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence /7-FVqDx8  
limits. @?0))@kPc3  
RESULTS m YhDi  
Study population H87k1^}HV  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 lg^Lk\Y+re  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) -KqMSf&9  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did FIQHs"#T  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was V[7D4r.j  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as )2:U]d%pk  
a whole. @%^h|g8>Fu  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to w`zS`+4  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 1ZvXRJ)%  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to _+%p!!  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural ;iUO1t)^  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) Jl$ X3wE  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. ?U2 'L2y  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery jgfr_"@A  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases %Bg>=C)^(1  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any mZjP;6  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). @U =~ c9  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three x5M+\?I<2  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence R~RE21kAc  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes |HwEwL+  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% -L wz T  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract k<rJm P{  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract mdcsL~R  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall )6px5Vwz  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was bj?= \u  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). z|$9%uz "  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract G P `sOPr  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified _k(&<1i  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated *mW2vJ/B  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 1buO&q!vn  
as information about risk factor exposure was not nrbP3sf*  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed Z!l]v.S  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence h)z2#qfc  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 0*AXd=)"*  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a Z,8t!Y  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use va0}?fy.O%  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private wv Mp~  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, U7-*]ik  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. g3(LDqB'.  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the vXG?8Q  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 8wn{W_5a  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract x]t$Zb/Uxa  
surgery were not available.  eAG)+b  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate 8U!$()^?  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had /+m2|Ij(  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been |AS<I4+&  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment ^Ww5@  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant GH`y-Ul'K  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression z :u)@>6D1  
model. The factors that remained significantly related R'fEw3^  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever x1Z*R+|>2  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been > iYdr/^a  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Z{?T1 =n  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate z|\n^ZK=  
model. ^1_CS*  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract dEW= V"W  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 3jHg9M23[^  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 q4,/RZhzh  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort Oz )/KZ  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total W{~ y< `D  
(years) (%) (%) (%) t]?{"O1rC  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) : t /0  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) xC}'"``s  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) !T 9CpIM%  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) [8%q@6[  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) eBY/Y6R  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) W>: MK-_ J  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) O- LwX >  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) Y/T-q<ag8  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) nq~fH(QY  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 5u3KL A  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) +wQ}ZP&  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) COmu.'%*  
Age-standardized }Z< Sca7  
(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) 0)ZLdF_6  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 B]6Lbp"oo  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% GSd:Plc%  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, AWssDbh/[  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). AlkHf]oB  
Outcomes of cataract surgery o w b+,Gk(  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior S4-jFD)U  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were o[i*i<jv-  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular Sw5:T  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular .rnT'""i<5  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Upcx@zJ  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of sg49a9`8  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected E'5KJn;_7  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% T<NOL fk66  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes G6G-qqXy6  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, V>GJO(9  
P = 0.027). v~jm<{={g  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity {9.UeVz  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without *X ;ch55\  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract } #L_R  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, dUl"w`3  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the @^  *62  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 7YK6e  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this xXa4t4 gR  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four $#2<f 6  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these P1B=fgT  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction |v5 ge3-  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 9=}[~V n  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract YRr,{[e  
surgery. udIm}jRA"  
DISCUSSION \i@R5v=zL  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically [@8po-()L  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract kv,!"<  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes (2M00J-o  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual ,d&3IhYhD  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and +zq"dj_  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is )*{B_[  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, ?!/8~'xA6  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract n:) [ %on  
services throughout Australia. F4WX$;1  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age |G$-5 7fk  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is Ip=QtNW3 \  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous q(^iT~}  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye wvxz:~M  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract J:>o\%sF  
between studies because of different methodologies and K[0z$T\  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well Z f<T`'_d  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 6 R})KIG  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of YM'4=BlJHv  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. {6:*c  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity bHE.EBZ  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. JoiGuZd>  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the nXoDI1<[  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. l"nS +z  
80 McCarty et al. *?HoN;^  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort oVn&L*H   
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total udA@9a^;  
(years) (%) (%) (%) K/f-9hE F  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) NFx%e  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( jG;J qT  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) sCrP+K0D  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 4m91XD  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) E w| Z<(  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) @P75f5p}<  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) ZCc2 3UwI  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) /(hTk&  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) !3k-' ),z&  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) )lS04|s  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) LDHu10l  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 'r%(,=L  
Age-standardized  .nrbd#i-  
(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) *!&?Xy%\"j  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ~Hub\kn  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Komdz/g  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 *9kg \#  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the jmaw-Rx  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude *p\Zc*N;%  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 0{bl^#$f  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 0q-lyVZ^X  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains .Hqq!&  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 2xO[ ?fR  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than ZZo<0kDk  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, l~]] RgU  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in a4~ B  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, _1G/qHf^S  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens @- |G_BZ  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. [[AO6.Z  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable l_:P |  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ij-'M{f  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that ! Ea! "}  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and AJ*17w  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is Fd<Ouyxqe  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted B?8*-0a'[  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement FD 8Lk  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We L k nK  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction E#(e2Z=  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have [=jZP,b&),  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this L$OZ]  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their kGAgX tE  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants zu @|"f^`  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the mp$IhJ6#  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ er3~gm  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their `f~bnL  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to f]%S FQ+  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change v; #y^O  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function xtv%C  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Fn`Zw:vp6  
overall quality of life.22 Qv ~@  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually dE,E,tv  
significant posterior capsule opacification following Jaw1bUP!oK  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 06AgY0\  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated Q}B]b-c+E  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear >Df; 1:U  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an +0%r@hTv&>  
opaque capsule. 0g: q%P0  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and EL3X8H  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, +?"F=.SZ  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We AH'c:w]~  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more )HE{`yiLL  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is %zGv+H?  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 xOShO"4Z   
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any c;q=$MO`  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of l([aKm#  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care &\6},JN  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without L)U*dY   
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the F5x*#/af  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated *\'t$se+  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. xf;>o$oN0P  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem LRu*%3xx  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ;[ Dxk$"  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will F%p DF\  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the y(g]:#  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in pEcYfj3M  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well Zx{Sxv"  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes %+Nng<_U\T  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. !?ZR_=Y%  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract )_C>hWvo_  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for Z_bVCe{  
cataract extractions increases. %.`u2'^  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  G-1qxK  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants ly34aD/p~,  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the &S+*1<|`K  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell :35h0;8+  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 3t+{ ~{Dj  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient lq53 xT  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal 25`W"x_  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. FEu}zt@  
REFERENCES 7Dssr [  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. rG~W=!bj  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 6P >Y2xV:  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, U3B&3K} ~  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population 4.,|vtp  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. qk'&:A  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens vA:ZR=)F  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ]aMDx>OE  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ZhCz]z~tj6  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ~u1~%  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. dkEbP*y Xg  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. Q?j '4  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye @Yb8CB  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population rN#9p+t$  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: X$u l=iBs  
363–71. y=\&z&3$  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. r%=a:GdAg  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye e^\(bp+83  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. # {k $Fk  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. N4VZl[7?  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient /o$6"~t  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. VWdTnu  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. |QbCFihn  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated V+>RF  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. <<qzZ+u  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. n@kJ1ee'  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too @/As|)  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal aW|=|K  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: h8.(Q`tli  
77–80. wb#[&2i  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice ! Y UT*  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? w(+ L&IBC  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 2|exY>`w  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest c3fi<?0&|  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye Gl{2"!mt=  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic Gz\wmH&rVz  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. \N?lG q  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 9@M;\ @&g  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. >PdrLwKS  
82 McCarty et al. BB1_EdoG  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & c2GTN"  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. 7PfNPz<4+  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume `tHF}  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International CIwI1VR^  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. J +Y?'"r  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and #cD$ DA  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. ,HE{&p2y  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison ~:C`e4  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased Y?oeP^V'u  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment NS x-~)  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 54]UfmT%I  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the 'UCClj;?K  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health X"f]  
Organization, 1997. Kx;la  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, z^KBV ^n  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation _lH:%E*  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. qssK0!-  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. ^m.%FIwR  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of ncR]@8  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative /5>A 2y  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. 1B{u4w7S4e  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. R C!~eJG!  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated o8A(Cg}  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. cGg ~+R2P  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. `Z@qWB<  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract Jjx1`S*i  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and @# p{,L  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. Fe 7 8YDx?  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. @Rqn&tA8  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to K>2Bz&)  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 3qp\jh=FE  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. vri<R8  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A l8DZ2cw]  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule N/B-u)?\:  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. }K 2fwE  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. [@$t35t~  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health @PKY>58)  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. l.SoiFDd  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in ~Y7:08  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, _GL:4  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract E^Z?X2Z  
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:
4+6=? 正确答案:10
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交