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 dt0(04  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes K#Xl)h}y7  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to i|0!yID0@  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 7[0<,O6Q  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual >U.7>K V&  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ( G~ME>  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination ]x66/O\0u  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography Ce~Pms]  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ]z]=?;ty%  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ix38|G9U  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or :QF`Orb!^  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. XtE O)  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 11Uu5e!.  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 KO/#t~  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria Od~ e*gA8  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract RB6TM  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had (=j/"Mb  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 a p(PI?]X  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber a '?LC) ^  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber ;2[OI  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated n'?]_z<  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or  ~fs} J  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 5k?xBk=<  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate ] .Ra=^q  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery W e*uZ?+  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% f(\S +4  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone U lCw{:#F  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an xZ* B}O{{H  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision 4q?R3 \e;  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ~mZ[@ Z  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 69t6lB#;!  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance 1;!dTh  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated cY+n 6k5  
cataract. )`2ncb   
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is '}OAl  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced uz:r'+v  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of BAG#YZB  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes |x=(}g  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. PG @C5Rnu  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health Dc 84^>l  
services accessibility, prevalence 5A%Uv*  
INTRODUCTION F3 g$b,RMH  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in -zZb]8\E  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 3ly ]DTbz  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ^* CKx  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be 9lkl-b6xG  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 )EcfEym.>  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting S2 P9C"  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is mZ0_^  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in D+w ?  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists ,,g: x  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather q9\(<<f|  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral E{\T?dk1$  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ?\<Kb|Q  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for n<eK \ w  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has j#l1KO^y  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 "y ;0}9]n1  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is ^a|  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the R[#B| $  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract &O5&pet  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence dO9bxHMnM  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors D+h`Z]"|  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to v5FfxDvw  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ;Wn0-`_1,  
METHODS WpkCF p  
Study population N*KM6j  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual MEtKFC|p  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 jk])S~xl?  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to `R-VJR 2"  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. aOEW$%  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of +1eb@b X  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen x139Ckn  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites ;v ~xL!uQ  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. p(yHB([8  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 Mu_'C$zA  
Original Article d81[hT}q  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia C1-Jj_XQ.  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD z bDK$g6  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia :eSwXDy&  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, Emv9l~mIu  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ~tB9 kLFG  
78 McCarty et al. = Fwzm^}6  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Jx8DVjy  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural V|;os  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify %vU*4mH  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a l R^W*w4y  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of rTeADu_vf  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, E{'\(6z_  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of f/i[? gw  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. q94*2@KV  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local J 77*Ue ^  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 4Gsq)i17j  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian l i2/"~l  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. ^NO;A=9b[  
Assessment of cataract 2/l4,x  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after H&0S  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine n s&(g^  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the NqN9  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using ''CowI  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and PML84*K -  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on |bjLmGb  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) s;:quM  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, #EO],!JM  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, -257g;  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than A Zv| |8p  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ,+RoJwi m  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual A|P `\_  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, V;]U]   
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 6bt{j   
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to Z/I`XPmk  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the IeJ@G)  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight & /lmg !6  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the JLV?n,nF  
analyses. hin6cac  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., tqK}KL  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in eR5+1b  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. " qrL:,   
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 4$b9<:M_  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 7j%sM&  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were [0hZg  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera @GE:<'_:{  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 @7<m.?A!  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately g].hL  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated w'Q2Czso  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies _fANl}Mf:  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were 1Du9N[2'P  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, BXo9s~5Q  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph S~ 3|  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical VR0#"  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) oM#S. f?  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to V/7?]?!xu  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. $U/_8^6B0  
Assessment of risk factors b(H) 8#C  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information yw)Ztg)  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ;M Z@2CO  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration xF3H\`{4x  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 0,`$KbV\  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension OT5'cl  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and TID0x/j"K5  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were o(@F37r{?  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to >h m<$3  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants +(<}`!9M*  
and use of vitamin supplements. v+Q# O[  
Data management and statistical analysis lC i_G3C  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a /aB9pD+%  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, cIgicp}U  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or Ma3Hn  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 6gfdXVN5  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 'HV}Tr  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and c};Qr@vpo  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency J ZQ$ *K  
checks were performed on the entire data set. lA<IcW  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was 'm=9&?0S  
employed for statistical analyses. '4A8\&lQO  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific &7X0 ;<  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to C6 eon4Ut  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five Sk$ XC  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates QE5 85s 5  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific $sO}l  
data were weighted according to the 1996 x9HA^Rj4-  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 8X]j;Rb  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. E4[\lX$J  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared <96ih$5D1  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated Bd"7F{H  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted f K^FD&sF  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the $(}kau  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. eeb 8v:4  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically (s{%XB:K  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use a@,tf'Sr  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The Ye!=  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment tQJ@//C\z  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ^O\tN\g;c  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence VV] {R'  
limits. sS(^7GARa  
RESULTS =$Q3!bJ  
Study population #>ci!4Gz=Z  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ^"+cJ)  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) i$:CGUb  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did Punbw\9!d,  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was B{1+0k  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as p dnL~sv  
a whole. n7<<}wcV  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to cB<0~&  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 9y]$c1  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to `O}. .N]g  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural " 31C 8  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) p-KuCobz]  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 'OX6e Y5   
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery oHi&Z$#!n  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases |+`hSA  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ir,Zc\C  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). m_Fw ;s/9  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three bh7 1Zu  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence Ca1)>1 Vz  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes &_90E  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% %W&=]&L  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract [#R%jLEJ2  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract *10e)rzM  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall 10}Zoq|)n  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was giu~"#0/F  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). C,I N+@  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract U<6k!Y9ny  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified s*8hN*A/,  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated zA"D0fr  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents k Lv_P[I  
as information about risk factor exposure was not "BVz5?  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed \W( p)M  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence %~W }262  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 3x=F  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a rL,)Tc|"  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use =6W:O  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private h ?ia4t  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, TAAsV#l  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. tm|lqa  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the R/Y/#X^b  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having c\] L  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract yCkm |  
surgery were not available. zgRP!q<9tt  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate .y0]( h  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had fgp 7 |;Y  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been @LE?XlhD  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment (Dar6>!  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant K?;p:  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression m+m6"yE#_  
model. The factors that remained significantly related tZ@ +18  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever F889JSZ%  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been 8x9kF]=  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Vd/S81/  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate k41la?  
model. _eQ P0N  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract #pe{:f?  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with J@GfO\ o  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 4'd{H Rs  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort -PnC^ r0L$  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Hr+-ndH!Pq  
(years) (%) (%) (%) )T64(_TE  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) Y1 P[^ws  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) N-rm k  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ]hj1.V+  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) X}*o[;2G  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) &5.~XM;  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) ^)q2\ YE;  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) u!uDu,y  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) k,7+=.6  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) "k-ov9yK  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) '%EZoc/U  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) uit-Q5@~  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) X[E k'=}  
Age-standardized p{a]pG +3  
(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) , Ln   
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 Q$)|/Y))  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% Q H_W\W  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, *yaX:,'\$  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). >Mn>P!  
Outcomes of cataract surgery uXLZtfu{  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior b%;59^4AjD  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were ^v!im\ r  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ~u0xXfv#  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular 2Nn1-wdhb  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact ;:Z=%R$wJ  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of C 6d]tLE  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 20VVOnDY  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% (.1 rtj  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes irsfJUr[V  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, :B=8_M  
P = 0.027). ~*!u  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity b(RB G  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without Px?Ao0)Z,  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract Znta#G0  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, voV:H[RD9  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the x pTDYF  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 nMG rG  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this JzMZB"Z?  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four #%^\\|'z  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these 's[BK/  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction Xlv#=@;O]  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one !7*(!as  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract .G}k/`a  
surgery. 2QGMe}  
DISCUSSION ]4Y/xi-  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically BWUt{,?KU  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract lwOf)jK:J  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes XDk'2ycv  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual B6bOEPQ  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and |3{+6cg  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is YwL`>?  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, F7{R~mS;  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract QsF4Dl   
services throughout Australia. M$Fth*q{GD  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age $!G`D=  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is HU &)  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 5Yi Z-CQ>  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 3Y z]8`C  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract +UxI{,L  
between studies because of different methodologies and *URdd,){i  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well }^"0T-ua  
as the different age structures of the study populations. &1 wpGJqm  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of <cYp~e%xIw  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. Dg~ [#C-  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 3bH~';<  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. q] ^,vei  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the M% @  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 9e~WK720=  
80 McCarty et al. d.`&0  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort a/~29gW8E\  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total *>k!hq;j  
(years) (%) (%) (%) %e{(twp  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) b^ sb]bZW  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( e*:}$u8 a  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) KmQ^?Ad- C  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 1Bg_FPu  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) as r=m{C"  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) )lh8 k {  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) V&i2L.{G)  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ?*H9-2W@  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) nUc;/  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) R \5Vq$Q  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ! _{d)J  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 6NX3"i0 eT  
Age-standardized QHzgy?  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) \i ru7'S  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract _s+c+]bO  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. A59gIp*>  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Qz+sT6js-  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the b9Y_!Qe  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude `T"rG }c  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the B +Aj*\Y.  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). y-9+a7j  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains [i7YVwG4  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban  s;Y<BD  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 6~8F!b2  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, /L v1$~  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in %8mm Hh  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, h*w6/ZL1  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens S1b Au <  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. 3yV'XxC  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 9(,@aZ  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ~R]35Cp-#  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 0$HmY2 Men  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and idc4Cf+4  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is &@v<nO-  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted YF[f Z  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement U BZ9 A  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We aeP[+I9  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction xT*d/Oaw  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 6bO~/mpWT~  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this h<6UC%'ac  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their *>q/WLR  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants aFj.i8+  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the @f1*eo5f  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ r"{<%e  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their E JK0  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to LM)`CELsYc  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change ?KE$r~dn  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function OJO!FH)  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in {b)~V3rsY  
overall quality of life.22 4QHS{tj  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually %O[N}_XHEh  
significant posterior capsule opacification following c64v,Hj9  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% Ex BUpDQc  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated /t%u"dP"T~  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear 0s#Kp49-  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an <|B1wa:|  
opaque capsule. Nw_@A8-r  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and v-b0\_  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, eU@Cr7@,|  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We V$`Gwr]|n  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more J3R B]O_  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is u+m,b76  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 2x]>l? 5b  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any o{qr!*_3  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of g|X;ahTT  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care 56lCwXCgA  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without D/ybFk  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the ;bzX% f?|G  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated JuR"J1MY  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. G3P &{.v  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem gmKGy@]  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract enS}A*Io  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will x&sI=5l  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the 2j JmE&)7,  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 'NjzgZ~]P  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well !^#jwRpeN  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 3981ie  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. B(a-k?  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract !l?.5Pm])  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 8I20*#  
cataract extractions increases. ?liK\C2Z<  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Y`7~Am/r;&  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants XgN` 7!Z  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the K%<j=c  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell <~ad:[  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 6oaazB^L  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient <9E0iz+j  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal b5$Jf jI  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. H&1[n U{?>  
REFERENCES cMyiW$;  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 2]GdD*  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 'w>_+jLT  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, fbyQjvURnC  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population 3 &u_A?;  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. h~&gIub  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens =9oP owq  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated D']ZlB 'K  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 3G.5724,  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related $vHU$lZ/W  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. R1nJUOE4w^  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. tQZs.1=z  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye Nx{$}  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population ;\EiM;Q]  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: .s#;s'>g  
363–71. SH*C"  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. ,Jcm+ Wb  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye lb'GXd %  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. iXyO(w4D  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. >=]'hyn]]  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient da1]mb=4 5  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Gpm{m:$L  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. )o\jJrVDf  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated e]jH+IR:>  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. z4 &iK)x  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. WL`9~S  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too b;)~wU=  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal a0Ik`8^`  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: qc#)!   
77–80. b T 2a40ul  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice Rb(SBa  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? a_h]?5 :c  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. K |DWu8  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest C&++VRnm  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye lN9=TxH1(;  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic c5|:,wkx  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. 0flg=U9  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading @iEA:?9uX  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. Z3!f^vAi&  
82 McCarty et al. \,J/ r!  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & 3s"0SLS4  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. QXF aAb=(7  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume h^j?01*Et  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International "_2Ng<2  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. (%O@r!{  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and gIA@l `"  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 1Z{ZV.!  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 9o>8o  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 6rS$yjTX!  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment eHDef  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. "TH6o: x  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the ~Y.tz`2D  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ]tY ^0a  
Organization, 1997. N25V ]  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, m[k_>e\ u  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 7mm1P9Z  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. t#!yrQ..'G  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. r\;ut4wy  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of vd6l7"0/  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative WL{(Ob  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. hQNe;R5  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. ITy/eZ"&:  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated U.{l;EL:T  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. z#F.xVg'  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. !a$ D4(`v  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract f3|@|'  ;  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and \n9zw'  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5.  X\}Y  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. dJ?XPo"Cm=  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to cQ:"-!ff  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. ]; %0qb  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. fm~kM J  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A T;L>P[hNn  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule 34!dYr%  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. 'Peni1_  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Z/rTVAs@r  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health s_.]4bl.8  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 5sPywk{  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in f lgRpXt  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, mJB2)^33a  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract ,<DB&&EV8  
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:
2+6=? 正确答案:8
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交