Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
Y&/]O$< 2006;
f!O{%ev 34
uV 7BK+[O : 880–885
3O7!`Nm@ doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
dt2$`X18 © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
^bEc6`eE "M|zv
Correspondence:
t|~YEQ Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au #v<QbA Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
keB&Bjd& Original Article
L#vI=GpL,r Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
5uxBK"q Jambi N Garap
kWdi595 MMed(Ophthal)
'uq#ai[5I ,
;|UF)QGa2 1,2
,=l7:n Sethu Sheeladevi
qIld;v8w"g MHM
P;k0W>~k ,
_x!7}O#k 3
JwJ7=P=c Garry Brian
dDF
.qXq. FRANZCO
(
H6c{'& ,
;\p KDPr 2,4
Unsogd BR Shamanna
{#)0EzV6 MD
'Y]mOD^p ,
,Jd
',>3 3
)
n ,P"0 Praveen K Nirmalan
e*L.U~ZR MPH
%Qj;, #z 3
",!1m7[wF and Carmel Williams
'3?\K3S4i MA
zL\OB?)5J
4
i\dc>C ; 1
0Q^Ikiv The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
7^g&)P 2
G#?Sfn O0 Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
$jg*pmR- Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
,u/aT5\_ 3
95z]9UL International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
0pbtH8~ L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
sq;s]@~ 4
N&M~0iw The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
eQ&ZX3*} Key words:
U{VCZ*0cj blindness
#es9d3~\ ,
>$ e9igwe cataract
4)("v-p ,
>
ss/D^YS Papua New Guinea
?`4+cx}n ,
qs QNjt surgery
!ki.t ,
kVy\b E0o vision impairment
g=$1cC+( .
f`&dQ,; I
/*c\qXA5 NTRODUCTION
6KOlY>m] Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
(1NA has more than five million people spread across several major
h@LHRMO and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
qvv2O1c"A land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
Uv4`6>Ix
dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
QQV~?iW{~ younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
W[}s o6 1
v= N!SaK{ Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
Bdu&V*0g 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
6}KZp~s particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
fa<v0vb+ and justice, and development and management of basic
+a*^{l}AST health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
nM0[P6p population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
+|ycvHd and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
+tD[9b!
m There are significant and growing economic, health and education
H/"lAXfb disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
(k|_J42[ Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
t2r?N}"P Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
Zt3)]sB full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
5A4&+rdU training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
t&(PN%icD in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
V3ndV-uQE have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
:hI@AA>g One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
rgOfNVyJG< based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
Z*Fr
B58 Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
Glpe/At and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
OGY"<YH6 provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
z-c}NdW Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
/P
2[:[w of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
a:_I in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
<u=4*:QE some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
E!O\87[ in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
sIv)' service reports
sQ8s7l0D 2,3
84{Q\c and a community assessment
8O"U 0 4
RO3oP1@B ), there has
NxLXm, been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
8+Bu+|c%f A
^`D=GF^tX BSTRACT
x{&w?ng Purpose:
8#D:H/`' To determine the prevalence of visually significant
;zdxs'hJ cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
Zx$ol;Yd for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
U #~;)fZ Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
b,IocD6v;P outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
K)_WL]RJ.4 Methods:
v{<[)cr Using the World Health Organization Rapid
>\!4Mk8 Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
Hp|}~xjn based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
28OWNS
M= 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
%AW4.3()8 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
%5*@l vy acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
5IKL#V`3a was examined.
x^*1gv $o Results:
"EV!>^Z Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
vEG'HOP examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
RL
[E X5U prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
9GdB#k6W` acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
gip/(
/NX confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
Bg8#qv =
%/.a]j! 1.3).
T$=4O9G That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
cubUq5 acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
A*tKF&U5 5.1, 7.3, deff
#?B%Ja%
;W =
~}DQT>7$ 1.1). The latter was not associated with
MEiRj]t gender (
3I 0eW%, P
k8]O65t| =
~svO*o Wa 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
gX5&d\y at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
F&;
Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
XUV!C7 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
Cz^Q5F` prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
:1)DqoAJ was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
o0z67(N&g =
/\Q*MLwD 1.3). Vision outcomes of
~2_lp^Y surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
%G3sjnI;l Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
@o e\"vz seeking and undergoing surgery.
%"A_!<n@*` Conclusion:
%|XE#hw Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
5 ZfP surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
?PPZp6A3L= care services.
2)/NFZ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
dX
)W0 © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
gmSQcN) This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
gY9\o#)< based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
K6pR8z*? those 50 years and older in PNG.
CV.+P- M
;8B.;%qkL ETHODS
RB3 zHk% The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
keqcV23k Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
rj H`
survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
]7qiUdxt: (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
.`C
V^\ December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
Nf?\AK! World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
]HvZ$ Cataract Surgical Services
BgRZ<B` 5,6
U w Eiz protocol. Characterization of
YL^Z4: p cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
yBn_Kd was part of that study.
.2X2b<%) As reported elsewhere,
]
h~o],: 7
dbO# the sample size required, using a
6[==BbZ prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
Hq
xK\m%,. visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
5}a
"?5J^ target population, precision of
^Rmoz1d ±
Tb# 20%, with 95% confidence
c#\-%h intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
eF1.VLI size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
$pFk"]= sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
`-D$Fsl security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
:dDxxrs" in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
m
y,x9UPs coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
2z-$zB<vyw Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
\GHOg.
P this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
v>at/ef to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
uL>:tb sampling strategy.
8_iHVc;< Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
WF)s*$'uz; using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
#{w5)|S#JD that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
D -iUN year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
DR{]sG members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
RHXvee55 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
{_as!5l from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
I{<;;;
a This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
YZ*{^' required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
&(0N.
=R cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
lEa W7
j nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
\-G5l+! obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
LT(?#)D
A standardized survey record was completed for each
>D3zV.R participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
54wM8'+ information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
2*YP"Ryh also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
]
?9t - the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
r_=p,#}# for agreement between the four volunteers designated
_r7=&oL.Q to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
fOJj(0=y The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
'ucG
t acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
,0.|P`|w of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
@LHtt/& services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
#Wq#beBb done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
aulaX/'-_ four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
<]c#)xg smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
X-v~o/r7 with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
9kUV1? was also measured.
9g4QVo| An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
l&$*}yCK cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
GA7u5D"0 of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
SUo^c1)G loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
0|GpZuGO9 pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
z6Fun was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
IF& PGo reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
5UPP
k$8` lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
X+d&OcO=q transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
?C
FS}v present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
{$3j/b capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
kz$(V(k< to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
S\}?zlV or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
HKM~BL
"X any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
*ZX!EjICk with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
dG"K/| undilated pupil.
uSH>$;a A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
_`slkwP. a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
`!] R!T@C any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
G]1(X38[si to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
=rtS#u
Y than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
x GwTk opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
b{zAJ`|#[n findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
C{8i7D loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
0S%tsXt+ contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
-mE study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
hEVjeC eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
UwZu:[T6H treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
#Tup]czO treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
?s1u#'aO when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
M' a& refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
X\o/i\ C} was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
w906aV*s present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
x%_qJ]o determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
: =
]sq}IN associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
<WZ1- example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
?SB[lbU be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
LDT'FwMjy Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
GS$ZvO in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
=Jsg{vI about the reasons for not having surgery. The
%zA2%cq< responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
gJ<@;O8zu0 of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
HXD*zv@ *6 recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
IyrZez were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
6(ka"Vu~ surgery.
E}xz7u Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
[$
hptQv to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
uAW*5 `[ detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
>P<k[vF age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
7xLo4 afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
A6@+gP< the case.
OVDMC4K2z! The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
O\|C,Epm entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
d[s;a.
of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
5QqJI#4~ cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
yRgDhA estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
G=
r(SJq of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
XA&tTpfJE 882 Garap
sf.E|]isW et al.
LU-#=1Q © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
u\Nw:Uu i year 2000
pl
jV|.? 1
*eJhd w* was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
k#8S`W8^ point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
_'?8s6 H of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
USnD7I/b STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
vSyi}5D test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
;[WSf{k logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
.d#
G]8suF used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
6T{o3wc; P
)rs|=M=Xk -
~xlMHf value of
6k@% +<1 <
9sfB+]}h 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
[B2>*UPl The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
By51dk7 calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
Z3X&<Y5 the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
0%A(dJA6 in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
:oon}_MdRd the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
RAD4q"}k combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
PO1:9 currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
4t%:O4
3e 6/60
7tf81*e =
JEm?26n X 100
C%95~\Ds a
0?5% /(
ERX
|cc a
!q=Q~ea +
Zs3]|bUR b
[)J49 ), where
9(N)MT5F a
.Kh(F6
s =
oQ-|\?{;A pseudophakic
Jc"$p\ $- +
`!Ge"JB6
aphakic eyes,
TReM8Vd and
X>@.-{6T b
0oi5]f6g?8 =
7QOC]:r eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
Qq FfR# 8
%:be{Y6 The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
8O.:3%D~
t was determined. This considers people with operated
b
Kt3x+x( cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
xeP;"J} operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
!irX[,e =
G|PIH# 100(
^?^|Y?f2P? x
Vg [5bJ5 +
C1Pt3 y
t1RwB23 )/
aIt
0;D (
4KSP81}/\ x
T\e)Cz
z2- +
"$:y03V y
Aya;ycsgE +
=<FZ{4 z
>A'!T'"~ ), in which
VzYP:QRz x
aXK%m
=
E?q'|f persons with unilateral pseudophakia
98%tws` or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
IO)Ft caused by cataract in the other eye,
DIu72\ y
I{g2q B$6 =
x]J-q5 persons with bilateral
\=G
Xe.}4d previously operated cataract, and
VX>t!JP p z
VU'l~%
ql =
?>\]%$5o persons with bilateral
c%3
@J+z cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
(uK), *6B 8
FivaCNA The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
[MXXY operations per year per million of population, was also
y`@4n.Q estimated.
z` ?xS R
~V-
o{IA ESULTS
BMj&*p8R Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
BHE =Zo during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
?'#;Y"RT from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
~u`! Gi remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
1:s~ ]F@ (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
3
Co>3d_ Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
R]sjG< vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
m)RxV@ (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
vHe.+XY (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
$I0a2Z=dP 7
l
YA+k
5 in the
zw9ULQ$# former, and the leading cause of the latter.
XN%D`tbvJ For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
00wH#_fm cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
A"ph!* i{ (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
jtpN o~O (
pR7G/]U$A P
(xJBN?NRO <
l>P~M50D?{ 0.001), illiteracy (
8-6{MJ?F P
H$iMP.AK <
WW@"75t 0.001) and unemployment
^o<Nz8 (
}slEkpk?] P
@].aFhH`) <
S?WUSx*N 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
gz:c_HJ blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
1:V/['|*g) P
$k=r
d#3 =
*Y>'v% 0.6).
uty]-k In a multivariate model that included all variables found
RS=7W._W significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
j+v)I
= 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
iKO~#9OF aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
$S=OmdgR 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
z`6KX93 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
7P(:!ce4- were associated with functional cataract blindness.
ld0WZj
The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
xk<0QYv
previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
-O6o^Dk (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
4K,&Q/Vdd7 P
RR9s%>^ =
'/@VG_9L] 0.02), male
yw^,
@' gender (
Cr"hu; P
R``qQ;cc =
}\*|b@)] 0.02), literacy (
+d.Bf P
34:=A0z <
o
qTh ) 0.001) and employed status
_=p|"~rN$ (
_;+&'=6.[ P
"5FeP; =
g.qp _O 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
#=c%:{O{4R was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
rA7S1)Kq surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
xC]/i(+bA model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
%r!-*p<i| status.
ewR0e.g The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
[DviN 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
.FyC4"b=c 45.3%.
<U";V) Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
Yp$lc^)c> (
B("kE` P
~drNlt9jf <
K!j2AP3 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
{1mD(+pJ{ P
%vI
]"a@ <
d#su 0.001). Also, most
F~6[DqF\|
of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
5;+Bl@zGu 5 years ago (
U8z,N1]r*` P
\_oHuw <
=:lacK(0 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
P]G2gDO receive intraocular lens surgery (
\4DH&gZ[ P
lEJTd3dMi <
_~r>C 0.001). Although most
*e=e7KC6kI surgery was provided free (
;)*Drk*t, P
&j$k58mX =
y_w4ei 0.02), males, who were more
S;
>_9 likely to have surgery (
N6eY-`4y P
$Khc?v =
`R\0g\ 0.02), were also more likely to
d]<tFx>CQW pay for it (
u+N[Cgh P
-7u4f y{T =
Z^b1i`v 0.03) (Table 2).
ey:3F% As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
7@:uVowQ both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
#R &F poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
IP-mo!Y. Table 1.
V\A?1
Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
|zSkQ_?54 Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
v vFX\j3 Vision impairment Blindness
{min9 Eye (presenting
>-Jutr<I"~ visual acuity less than 6/18)
EBJaFz' Person (presenting visual
* @dqAr % acuity less than 6/18 in the
6j0!$q^ better eye)
cu|{cy- Eye (presenting visual
A@GyKx%x$ acuity less than 6/60)
#=h~Lr'UH Person (presenting visual
k#U?Xs> acuity less than 6/60 in the
wj5{f5 RWV better eye)
&R2 5J$ Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
?me0J3u_ n
$Z
# %
zbrDDkZ1 n
R'He(x %
2!}5shB n
S'q (Qo %
|?g k%g n
oJEind>8O %
D >$9( n
THC34u] %
?!KqDI n
wP29xV"5 %
Bg{"{poy n
=XuBan3
B> %
7vZznN8e n
%8s$l'Q; %
[5yLg 50–59 years 266 27.9 49 14.6 84 22.8 23 13.4 74 18.0 37 14.3 17 14.2 10 11.1
ly9.2<oz}L 60–69 years 298 31.3 93 27.8 121 32.9 50 29.1 119 29.0 67 26.0 31 25.8 18 20.0
N$i!25F` 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
')zdI]@M 80
c"~+Y2]tL +
VG'M=O{)3 years 136 14.3 74 22.1 57 15.5 42 24.4 85 20.6 60 23.3 30 25.0 28 31.1
K?`Fpg( Male 467 49.1 157 46.9 180 48.9 77 44.8 203 49.4 123 47.7 59 49.2 41 45.6
`saDeur#X Female 485 50.9 178 53.1 188 51.1 95 55.2 208 50.6 135 52.3 61 50.8 49 54.4
bLuAe
EA All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
L;6L@D6 Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
KPTp91 © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
vr/*z euA one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
O7vJ`K(! vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
SA!P:Q?h spectacles were not required (Table 3).
?QR13l( ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
PaIE=Q4gJ was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
m%
7T ~ cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
(@X].oM^y and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
`,~8(rIM to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
Y~,ZBl, and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
6)5Akyz4V cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
fRlO.!0( DISCUSSION
)a99@`L\P The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
4+?d0 used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
B\*"rSP\ should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
KF!?;q0J Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
wB%N}bi! Category 136 cataract surgeries
*M^(A}+O Male Female Aphakia
`!- w^
~c (n = 74)
m6wrG`-di Pseudophakia
0*y|k1 (n = 60)
Wy:xiP Couched
k
z{_H`5. (n = 2)
*gGL5<%T: Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
o!$O+%4 Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
wg.TCT2 Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
VUd=|$'J Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
Ng,<4; Age at the time of surgery, years, mean ± SD 61.3 ± 9.7 60.5 ± 11.6 60.8 ± 10.6 63.4 ± 10.9 52 ± 0.0
HuB\92u Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
zb_nU7Eg Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
t?l0L1; Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Z4VNm1qs Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
r
P1FM1"M Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
,Y+J.8.H Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
f?Am) Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
a]]>(Txc Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
}}s.0Q Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
_DD.#YB</ Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
7%`
\E9t Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
zt3y5'Nk (a) 136 cataract surgeries
(U?*Z/ (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
g#}a?kTM@ (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
]Oh8LcE#BF Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
P-Up v6J3 n % n % n %
d(t$riFX} Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
ud`!X#e~ Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
D-KQRe2@ Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
4z*An}ol] Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
KEfx2{k b Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
ibj3i7G? n % n %
Ho!dtEs Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
vj#Y /B Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
"j*{7FBqk Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
0 v>*P* Reason n %
bsosva+ Never provided 20 29.9
~k[mowz0 Damaged 2 3.0
Xe. az Lost 3 4.5
w$fP$ \+ Do not need 42 62.6
:GBM`f@ †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
d) i64" pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
G\4*6iw: 884 Garap et al.
T=~D>2C © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
L5{DW
m~@ results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
.W*" C study’s results are the most systematically collected and
%xuJQuCqf objective currently available for eye care service planning.
UD6:X&Un Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
ze_q+Z prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
\#%1t 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
-+)06BqF} deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
Yb?L:,a(I to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
,)beK*Iw 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
uJ@C-/BD!M adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
K@R *
V in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
+B#+' deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
*74VrAo CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
cy{ ado2 However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
q:a-tdv2 in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
ra]lC7<H Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
79MF;>=tV 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
-:~"c@D much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
zg+6<
.Sf 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
FzM<0FJRX of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
:SJxG&Pm=~ have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
HB:VpNFn additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
d,+a}eTP' will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
/OtLIM+7~{ than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
Tk~Y 50 years.
$z
\H* The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
<4%cKW0 and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
NDYm7X*et CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
kPvR , respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
LE]mguvs CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
pr.+r?la] (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
D@?Tq,=
[ cataract surgery is performed on those under age
]X\p\n'@j 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
3!qp+i)? Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
Pk/3oF who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
,9YgznQ surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
:N#8|;J1Fl there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
C.N# y`g been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
<Gw>}/-^ 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
L&LAh&%{2 people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
P0<)E approximately 440 per million per year.
F1GFn|OA Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
r(OH the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
./@
C (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
q~6a$8+t records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
hn[lhC hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
mPJ@hr%3 surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
=Ohro' equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
sa
w year.
)zAATBb4. Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
GV8`.3DBOF estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
7RCVqc" country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
q_86nvB< bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
&6&$vF65c Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
$J9/AFzO" per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
_jM+;=f fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
WCyjp It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
lXip%6c7
PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
1k!$#1d< CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
F@<^ of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
CF]#0*MI relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
>A>_UT_" other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
yC\!6pg incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
g:2\S= is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
d~;U- (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
tvOyT6 ] this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
$g '4' will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
(".WJXB\ fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
T854}RX[{ for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
:LLz$[c8 in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
qF4=MQm\aE Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
;\
gat)0n% insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
,:pKNWY)Q by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
5!qLJmd= (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
<4Ik]Uz^ intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
jBU!xCO guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
K}8wCS F presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
T1
M>N
blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
-5Aqf\ Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
i+~H~k}"X (2005)
~`<_xIvrq 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
:tp{(MF Responses by 41
85ND 3F6q4 males (45.6%)
&?M'(` ~ Responses by 49
[t"#4[ females (54.4%)
|3=tF"h Responses by all
M[6WcH0/T n % n % n %
PjkjUP Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
Y 016Xg5 Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
#.|MV}6rQ Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
{oRR]> No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
j] Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
E[tEW0ub None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
7F8>w 7Y] Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
0]2@T=*kTY Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
g42f*~l Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
*.zC 9Y, © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
<%=@Ue resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
L%fJH_$_s activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
g BV66L manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
rNeSg=j would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
,{sCI/ to wear postoperation correction because they see well
,dSP%?vV enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
Awlw6?
refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
5+Hw @CY3 acuities (Table 3).
TbR!u:J Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
A IsXu" be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
]L9$JTGF`w (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
6F08$,%Y transportation, were made for study participants with visually
Y1L7s H 9 significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
.{66q#. all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
8?&!@3n this need further investigation.
$qfNEAmDf\ Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
jHBP:c
population, there would seem little point in raising demand
17@#"uT0 and expectations through health promotion techniques until
ec"+Il such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
4'U #<8 have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
aDVBi: _ cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
~"i4"Op& services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
c_)lTI4 and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
}?=4pGsI support team, are examples of what is possible,
f>jAu;S both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
_J-3{a is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
kc}&
\y of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
2j*o[kAE health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
[Z{0
|NR system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
J G3#(DVc; training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
f)%8*B improved.
br_D
Orq| It may be that the required cataract service improvements
@#KZ2^ are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
Q:sw*7"F health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
K9+%rqC.|` against which progress may be measured.
2JS&zF ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I,wgu:}P# The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
!(-S?*64l provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
= ,^eQZR: Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
H3qM8_GUA Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
>r~!'Pd! Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
.Pi
8c[ Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
zTQTmO their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
NY9\a[[^[8 was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
<zh N7=" Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
Mo_(WSs Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
'+*{u]\ REFERENCES
=&xNdc 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
tf_
<w?~ State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
d-sK{ZC"y PNG Government, 2000.
5
Yf
T 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
TSHQ>kP Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
Uel^rfE` 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
K,Z_lP_~Vw Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
M
h5>@-fEE 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
-VVJf5/ areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
c1L0#L/F6" 10: 13–18.
cczV}m2) 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
}4A $j{\ 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
l'0fRQc World Health Organization and International Agency
Nn]|#lLP for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
12JmSvD www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ ub,GF?9 installation_racss.htm
[@LA<Z_ 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
6mAaFDI,R H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
>/5'0n_R survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
-{ M(1vV(= 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
5U!yc7eBI/ vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
$63_*9 Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
7)U08" 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
@W+m;4 HH to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
:,'yHVG\ Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
(m3
<) 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
ZS\~GQbG services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
$pLJtQ 80: 300–3.
JsZLBq*lP 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
2#hfBJg@ and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
(SnrYO`# Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
e#/SFI0m 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
zD z"Dn
9 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
}S,KUH. 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
s=BJ7iU_68 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
%c"
t` World Health Organization and International Agency
31> $;" for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
8v V<A*` www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm vkgAI< 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
_ \LPP_ WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
' ] $mt 1998.
j
:$Ruy 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
T5gL quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
qQ
T^d developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
;T,`m^@zf 7.
XKQ\Ts2<k 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
*< ?~
improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
p.@_3^#| 2002; 86: 543–7.
X7Z=@d( 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
hvo7T@*' and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.