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

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT OxGS{zs  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ;S+UD~i[Bu  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to xY3 KKje  
unoperated cataract in Australia. FXpI-?#E<  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual T d7f  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than 4G:?U6  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination "OIra2O  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography yvPcD5s5  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Z6.0X{6nA  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater sj"zgE)  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or ~OuKewr\  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. NU>'$s  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne In[!g  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ("G _{tVU  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria z0@{5e$#Y  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract a&'!g)d  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had nnv&~C  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 XXx]~m  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber mes/gqrJ1I  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber w=dTa5  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated EWcqMD]4u  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or G*oqhep  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven ~9[^abz  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate E% B:6  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery !x%$xC^Iz  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% NC id`a$  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone  BZ'63  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an kYwV0xQ  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision g>@T5&1q *  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no D-v}@tS'  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural r5k{mV+  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance T>$S&U  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated nm8XHk]  
cataract. xcVF0%wVC  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is Eku+&f@RB  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced >[$j(k^  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of E8`AU<  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes pA~eGar_J  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. h'wI  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health [ST,/<?0  
services accessibility, prevalence E1"H( m&6  
INTRODUCTION 0@B hRf5  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in eeix-Wt*E  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 7uI~Xo ?N  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate +nOa&d\  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be WxgA{q7:  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 /'g/yBY  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting 40M/Gu:  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is +~ZFao qf  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in I<&(Dg|XQ  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists pOmHxFOOK  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather 2B !Bogs  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral +eIX{J\s  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has m })EYs1  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for an<loL W  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has }Q<c E$c  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ?T ( @<T  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is T`Jj$Lue{  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the Ra~|;( %d  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract :#pfv)W6t  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence BQ /0z^A  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Eg/=VBtc  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to 'xn3g;5  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. exfJm'R?n  
METHODS xBevf&tP  
Study population j3kcNb  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual B}|(/a@*  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 hp< NVST  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to rO;Vr},3\%  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. Lfj]Y~*z  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of /^jV-Z`  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen :"utFBO  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 5Y}=,v*h}  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. z ~R:!O-  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 UwQyAD]Ht  
Original Article "^3pP(8;~  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia `VzjXJw  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 8`? vWJS  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia `& rt>Bk /  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, `N,q~@gL  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au q,->E<8  
78 McCarty et al. <:gNx%R  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural QaAWO  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural "7RnT3  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify {:!CA/0Jx  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a pndAXO:v  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 9 }_ccq  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, 4a6WQVS  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of }1)tALA  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. 8F#z)>q~  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local _,C>+dv)  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. c|,6(4j>$  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian =SEgv;#KZ~  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. v[UrOT:  
Assessment of cataract "N\tR[P!  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after HAtf/E]  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine I6B`G Im5  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ),u)#`.l G  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using }+wvZq +c  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and r`8>@2sW1  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on 6bXP{,}Gp  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) E#L"*vh  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, -T0@b8  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 9BA*e-[  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than |sIr}}  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to 0:SR29(p1  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual w '<8l w  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, A/%+AH(  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. e~+VN4D&b>  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ;:/<XfZ  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the * t-Wol  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight H}[kit*9  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the pg4J)<t#  
analyses. q|N/vkqPz  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., :{YOJDtR  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 3S97hn{|=  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. c@]_V  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman bhqs%B!:  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph u0M? l  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were e9 `n@  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera jQgy=;?Lwm  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 "0&+ `7  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately xMb)4cw}  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 0)?.rthk4S  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies O'OVj   
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were t5qNfiKC  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, b\dzB\,&  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph EzXGb  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical :JEzfI1  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) OjUZ-_J  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to [YsN c  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. wTL&m+xr  
Assessment of risk factors "i}?jf {a  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information *A>I)a<:  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 xux j  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration _9^  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, RO]Vn]qb  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 78iu<L+If  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and [|XMR=\>  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were /]mfI&l+9  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to jmDQKqEc|l  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants ?dJ[? <aG  
and use of vitamin supplements. [+q':T1W-  
Data management and statistical analysis f:=y)+@1My  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a {GTOHJ2  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,  &Ow[  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or M[C9P.O%w  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at  2]$ 7  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms Q :<&<i=I  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and $rb #k{  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency l;N?*2zm[  
checks were performed on the entire data set. vy <(1\  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was LQ7.RK  
employed for statistical analyses. O0"u-UX{  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific yJ\K\\]  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 3C+!Y#F  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five cTU%=/gbc<  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates ~HW}Wik  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific $IM}d"/9  
data were weighted according to the 1996 d)_fI*:f  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 0/1Ay{ns  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. lWVvAoe  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared @w%{yzr%  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated w^_[(9 `  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted d".Xp4}f  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ,)S(SnCF  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. C EzTE rn  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically `t@Rh~B  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use H pZD^h?L  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ]vFtByqn  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment "kS(b4^  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with h{J=Rq  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 9kpCn.rJ  
limits. o7qZy |\4S  
RESULTS U_X/  
Study population T i{~  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 CDNh9`  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) e\9H'$1\  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did Tlz $LI  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was VGHy|5K$  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as ?3I93Bt7  
a whole. 3I" <\M4x  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to D^G5$h i  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The QJsud{ada  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to B{In "R8  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural q h+c}"4m  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) ~> xV hd  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. ^:(:P9h  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery B!;qz[]I  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases }Q=@$YIesD  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any zUe)f~4  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). qv+8wJ((  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three NV[_XXTv7  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence o#X=1us  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 'QMvj` -  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% U#7moS'r  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract e%B;8)7  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract WgV'T#*  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall .3tyNjsn\  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was b6LwKUl  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). p5`d@y\hj  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract bsn.HT"5  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified DaK 2P;WP  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated ?)60JWOJ1  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 6{qI  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 2&k5X-Y  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 6pKb!JJ  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence OFyZY@B-C~  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic gOE3x^X*{  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a .2si[:_(p  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use pFUW7jE  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private +( *;F4>  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, =,UuQJ,l  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. D+y_&+&,t  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the 7n_'2qY  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having ]Q%|69H}B  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract \Jcj4  
surgery were not available. #]BpTpRAe<  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate yD0,q%B`}  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had w(y#{!%+  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been X+: >&&9  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment Gm]]Z_  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant CQLh;W`Dc  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression * MJl(  
model. The factors that remained significantly related ?^# h|aUp.  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever K]b_JDEk  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been xyoh B#'W  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Fe 4QWB6\U  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate T%Vg0Y)P;  
model. Mohy;#8Wk  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract ()E:gq Q  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with h%hE$2  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 V!'N:je  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort pY3N7&m\:  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total K{ s=k/h  
(years) (%) (%) (%) U2tsHm.O  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) wGqQR)a  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) UL/|!(s  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) r " ^ {?0  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) NZ\aK}?~ !  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) F4m Q#YlrS  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) xLE+"6;W  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) brQkVt_)EE  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ;x[F4d  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) n 0X_m@  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) x 5u.D^  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) gyW*-:C  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) q2I;Ly\3o  
Age-standardized 2$D *~~  
(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) u_aln[oIv  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 5XNIX)H  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 1}E`K#  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, HQ%-e5Q  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). Co2* -[R  
Outcomes of cataract surgery mm3goIi; Y  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior GHHErXT\a  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were UarU.~Uqi  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular . +G),P)   
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular "y>\ mC  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact ]MkZ1~f7  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of +#5nk,1c>  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 9=&e5Oq}  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% |Xblz1>DF  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes 9.| +KIRb  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, NyD[9R?  
P = 0.027). %3e}YQe)  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity XD`QU m  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without h<.G^c)  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 8T'=lTJ  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, Fzk  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the oK h# th  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 dt Q>4C"N  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this ~R.8r-kD`  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four sXI_!)H  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these b r)oSw  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction <@n/[ +3  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one *=L3bBu?  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract sk!v!^\_r  
surgery. n.C.th >Y1  
DISCUSSION P}o:WI4.cB  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 58*s\*V` \  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract KyW6[WA9  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes H,qIHQW #  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual * B,D#;6  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 9|dgmEd  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is k,M%/AXd  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, ^~0Mw;n&  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract D;)Tm|XizW  
services throughout Australia. cj-P&D[Ny[  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age /hf}f=7kH  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is >`p `^:  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous r00waw>C\  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye !<]%V]5[_  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract z %` \p  
between studies because of different methodologies and ?b2  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well >/1N#S#9  
as the different age structures of the study populations. STs~GOm-  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of ?"PUw3V3lB  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 8Wid.o-U  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity KDgJ~T  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. X>2_G ol!  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the $"C]y$}  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. ~WU _u,:  
80 McCarty et al. 7+JQaYO`"  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort d/Xbk%`p  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total v0|A N  
(years) (%) (%) (%) ~YOwg\w^  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) , rc5r3  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( U 9TEC)  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) EsXCi2]1  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) |{+D65R  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) [Rw0']i`4  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) <~t38|Ff@  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) AU}e^1h  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) Q.#@xaX'{`  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) UvRa7[<y%%  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) -}1S6dzr  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) :pcKww|V  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 7g_:Gv~v  
Age-standardized ct=|y(_  
(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) G!T)V2y  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract R K#e7  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected.  d_gm'  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 ^;n,C+  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ?dlQE,hB$  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude lb5Y$ZC  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the e4u$+  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). YUJlQ2e(  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains x0@J~ _0  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ) Yz` 6  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than e5maZ(.;F  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ;H /*%2  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in _C~e(/=z  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, q0{KYWOvk  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens /vS!9f${  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. %@3AA<  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 3&_O\nD  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, Mz# &"WjF  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 7'Y 3T[  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and &G7JGar  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is %sP C3L  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted D oX!P|*  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 0R AmwfXm  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We &Z/aM?  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction z kQV$n{  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have ^_#0\f  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this t%ye :  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their c<L^ 1,G2  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants PN[ `p1F  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the v+f:VA  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ Rnt&<|8G  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their no`c[XY  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to _"SE^_&c  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change n3t1'_/TU}  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function B ~QX{  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in L22GOa0  
overall quality of life.22 W&ya_iP~C  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually L&ySXc=  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 0"7 xCx  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% |>@Gbgw^M  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated T#xC u|5  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear JUXIE y^  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an (iM"ug2  
opaque capsule. #3vq+mcn  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and #7I,.DUy[  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, l? v`kAMR  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We x*& OvI/o  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more n.jF:  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is yG|^-O}L  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 ?nJ7lLQA  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any BTjfzfO"  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of c;c'E&9P]  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care l [lUmE  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without l G12Su/  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the ga&l.:lo  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated Ug02G  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. w^MU$ubx  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem @r4ZN6Wn  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract v9R#=m/=  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will wEL$QOu$  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the E6a$c`H@?  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in XzI c<81Z  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well %Z~, F?  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes +shT}$cb1  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. le*mr0a  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract @/h_v# W  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for V&`\ s5Q  
cataract extractions increases. C{>@b:]p  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7NC "}JB&  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 'W>Bz,M6yo  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the pFi.?|6"  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell wHm{ 4  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 'teToE<i  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient "3o{@TdU  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal *O-1zIlp  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. qS<a5`EA  
REFERENCES N: 'v^0  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. WccTR aq  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. z-fP #.  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, H~%HT l  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population m[ *)sm  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. nIdB,  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens ixF '-  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated N*z_rZE  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. O{Bll;C  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related `tA~"J$32l  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. &!> )EHGV  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. W LGk  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye >qh8em  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population ~]X4ru5,4  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: J J@O5  
363–71. eh_ {-  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. X,VOKj.%  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye @+II@[ _lT  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. &}}c>]m  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. w$I<WS{J:Z  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient R3+y*< <e  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ',GWH:B  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. iaXpe]w$n  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated )>,; GVu"  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. gP=(2EVE  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. ^Wb|Pl  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too UHr0J jQK  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 0}:- t^P  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 1.\|,$  
77–80. V,t&jgG*  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice Jlgo@?Lc  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? hE.N W  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. lGHU{7j\  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest t(3<w)r2  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye xEv]V L:  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic /H 3u^  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. vbT"}+^Sh  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading Gvg)@VNr  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. >y&Db  
82 McCarty et al. }.md$N_F  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & >E*j4gg  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. ^7Sk`V  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume @C[]o.r  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International EOqvu=$6  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. #1-y[w/  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 5Fh?YS=  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. EPx_xX  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison  t~mbe  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased &Xr@nt0H  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment cYBv}ylw}R  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. QcZ*dI7]:  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the [S{KGe:g  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health _TF\y@hF*D  
Organization, 1997. X\X* -.]{  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, H. \gLIr  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 8r7}6  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. }e}J6 [wP  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. Jjt'R`t%t  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of B> kx$_~  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative #qL?;Zh0S  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. @^g/`{j>J  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. q}-q[p? 5  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated (1.E9+MquU  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. y*ae 5=6(  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. ,TrrqCw>  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract _g+^jR4  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and L_fu<W  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. ;{Cr+lqTJ  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. :f^ =~#!  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to H{*~d+:ol  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. anwMG0  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. d-%!.,F#W  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A F@e9Dz|  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule nic7RN?F<  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. 9NCo0!Fb  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. J7q]|9Hus|  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health T7f>u}T  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8.  $$E!u}  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in [t^Z2a{  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, S{cy|QD  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract 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:
freekaobo官方微信订阅号 正确答案:考博
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交