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 6Rif&W.xy  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes Q;y4yJ$wI  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 6 3PV R"  
unoperated cataract in Australia. `B8`<3k/(  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Zs0;92WL  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than Yc )Dx3  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination =<#++;!I  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography #jxPh!%9  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who (?7}\B\  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater d7&d FvG  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or Wy1.nn[  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. @3b@]l5  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne MR@Qn[RdM  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473  fOsvOC  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria +g1+,?cU  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract xu]Kt+QnSk  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 2}.~ 6EU/  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 - ?  i  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 0Nk!.gY  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber |{%$x^KyJ  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated s nNd7v.U6  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or <O-R  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven eAQ-r\h'2  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate ofYZ! -V  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery K1;b4Sl?A  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% j@UE#I|h  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone %l%2 hvGZ  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an i}|jHlv  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision }KftV nD?  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no (v0Q.Q@ <  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural  = ~*Vfx  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance ~e]l  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated -\Z`+kY?p  
cataract. X VH( zJ  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 9A`^ (  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced (enOj0  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of uE%2kB*]  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes 4^ 0CHy  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. t`eIkq|NxI  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health G8Ow;:Ro  
services accessibility, prevalence mZnsr@KF  
INTRODUCTION NXS$w{^  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in J'I1NeK  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all fNrpYR X  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate e?GzvM'2  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be |$GPJaNqa  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 3?+t%_[  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting XE;' K`%  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is h54\ \Ci  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in }n,LvA@[0  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists <c,iu{:  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather d]?fL&jr  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral M pz9}[`3g  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has Ga <=Di):  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for Yqt~h  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has g6][N{xW0  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 raMtTL+  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is c'bh` H4  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the JFkx=![  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract  ftV~!r  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence YTfi g{a  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors #1'p?%K.  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to 9SU/ 86|N  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. Xw16 2/:h  
METHODS K8v@)  
Study population 0p*Oxsy  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual WjvgDNk  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 DeQ ZDY //  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to qM d4awB R  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. z;&J9r $`  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of <CS,v)4,nH  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen TO/SiOd  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites Ai`0Ud,M@  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. Ed#Hilk'  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 8`|Z9umW*  
Original Article ;F /w&u.n  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia T^2o' _:  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD XU`vs`/   
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia )jw!, "_4  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, b C"rQJg  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au 2KNs,4X@  
78 McCarty et al. 2=n,{rkmj%  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Mw6 Mt  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural tG 0 &0`  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify cu4|!s`#  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a 58PL@H~@0  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of +"VXw2R_e  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, J>+~//C  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of p<Vj<6.=?  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. + ;B K|([#  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local w2V:g$~,  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. L#MMNc+  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian MVp+2@)}s  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. !Ic~_7"  
Assessment of cataract hhJs$c(  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after KY9@2JG  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine ^{64b  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the -D wO*f  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using *,Sa*-7(  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and E~`<n]{G-C  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on 9@YhAj   
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) Gp1?drF6  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, x#'v}(v  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, Mu$"fYKf"  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than f<Y g_TG  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ,BlNj^ 5f  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual {BD G;e  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, #6 M3BF  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. CD)JCv  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to D3C3_ @*  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the  $kY ]HI  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight 6f;20dn 6  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the  KH9D},  
analyses. U;FJSy  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., jJe?pT]o  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in m 8P`n  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 8]l(D  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman fD2 )/5j1  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 0W]vK$\F*  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were X=%e'P*X  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera QJU\YH%}  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 9+I /b l4  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately I$oqFF|D  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated noO#o+ Jg#  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies >ui;B$=  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were U,Z7n H3_  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, Qv1cf  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph m[Cp G=32B  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical Er<!8;{?  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) +RyV"&v  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to qzi i[Mf  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. REJHh\:.77  
Assessment of risk factors j -7aJj%  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information \n^;r|J7k  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 yhd]s0(!  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration !>)o&sM  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 7 /XfPF  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension G k:k px  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and OZQN&7  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ;e6- *  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to Pdk#"H-j  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants ` pfRY!  
and use of vitamin supplements. ^CP>|JWD^  
Data management and statistical analysis R _Z 9 aQ  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a I8{ mkh  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, gB]jLe  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or q$'[&&_  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at ;3+_aoY  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms ]E#W[6'VtB  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and _,3%)sn-)  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency _=HNcpDA;0  
checks were performed on the entire data set. y-mjfW`n  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was .H Pa\b\L>  
employed for statistical analyses. H/ar: j  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific p;~oIy\,  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to !1Nh`FN  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five -Sa-eWP  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates :-oMkBS  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 1,+swFSN  
data were weighted according to the 1996 YmLpGqNv  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the P2)/!+`a  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. Ru4M7 %  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared RV%)~S@!R  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated 8WC _CAP  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted fpJ%{z2  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the +3Z+#nGtk  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. S2>$S^[U  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically JH*fxG  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use S" (Nf+ux  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The w!-MMT4y  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment *'@ sm*  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with tTT :r),}$  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence cUn>gT  
limits. t :~,7  
RESULTS oA3;P]~[  
Study population V!NRBXg  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ]~ !CJ8d  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) T[MDjhv'  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did )&l5I4CIf  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was |XV `A)=f  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as u#NX`_  
a whole. .yD5>iBh  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to T8d=@8g,%  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The N:~4>p44[  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to v# e*RI2}  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural _7~q|  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) f,ZJFb98  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. ]dgi]R|`  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 'S*]JZ1  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases kSEgq<i!  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any I'[;E.KU  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). ./^8L(  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three CeM%?fr5  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence Q$sC%P(y  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes EAy@kzY?  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% ]c bXI  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract :jC$$oC].  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract \S&OAe/b  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall |*M07Hc x  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was ?cn`N|   
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). v=Q!i oE7  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract m/,80J8L+f  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified oTx>oM,  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated IZ87Px>zL  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents ]9c{qm}y  
as information about risk factor exposure was not MWK)Bn  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed kUfbB#.5L  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence kDxI7$]E  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic sH'0 utD#Y  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ,~DKU*A_~  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use -yb7s2o  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private |_QpB?b  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, Q laoa)d#  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. K\zb+  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the BOP7@D  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having W\ mgM2p  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract teC/Uf 5  
surgery were not available. =#[t!-@  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ~ wOMT  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had g9NE>n(3  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been >AY9 F|:  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment q&_\A0  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant BUV4L5(  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression eVB43]g  
model. The factors that remained significantly related a dRIg:2  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever 5wha _Yet  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been _a|g >  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors 2(Yg',aMY-  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate m1X*I  
model. _[i.)8$7  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract p$= 3$I  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with p GF;,h>  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 jTZi< Y:bB  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort VS_\bIC  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total -o~n 06p  
(years) (%) (%) (%) -N5h`Ii7  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) Aq7`A^1t$  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) B1s&2{L6K  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ^eefR5^_w  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) JUXBMYFu s  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)  w5rtYT I  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) ="f-I9y  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) g\?07@Zd|  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) Eza^Tbq%j?  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) qW|h"9sr  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) fA0wQz]u  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) U3v~R4  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) wV{j CQ  
Age-standardized oL }d=x/  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) ZtP/|P5@  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 Zm|il9y4m  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% nw_|W)JVQ  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 45iO2W uur  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). )te_ <W  
Outcomes of cataract surgery Z=%u:K}[  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior q$IU!I4  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were V:+vB "  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular QJ>=a./  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular ;j(*:Nt1  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact z&um9rXR  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 3/& |Z<f  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected */TO $ ^s  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% @T.F/Pjhc  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes J4iu8_eH!D  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,  :J)^gc  
P = 0.027). Et}%sdS  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 4j i#Q  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without N " eK9>  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ,.gJ8p(0x  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, <8Z %'C6d  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the =FFs8&PKys  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 ?9 `T_,  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this q?L*Luu+  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four \S~<C[P  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these xcJvXp  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 6+PP(>e m  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one /\1Q :B3W  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract wc~9zh  
surgery. A?)(^  
DISCUSSION 8@T0]vH&  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically CyB1`&G>  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract ~n/:a  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes F{}:e QD  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual *S Z]xrs  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and yG>sBc  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is J=n^&y  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, qEkhgJqk  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract %u]>K(tU  
services throughout Australia. dsb z\w3:  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age HI)U6.'  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ,l\D@<F  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous kaCn@$  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye QkO4Td<  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract fK=vLcH  
between studies because of different methodologies and ACgWT  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well qv/chD`C  
as the different age structures of the study populations. :/NP8$~@j  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of +,9Mufh  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. B#4 J![BX  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity %,)Xi  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. Mz6|#P}.s  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the UX'tdB !A  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. I,lzyxRP  
80 McCarty et al. ]JI A\|b6  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort i"hn%u$V  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total =iPQ\_ON@  
(years) (%) (%) (%) I~c}&'V  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) E __A1j*gd  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( hM`*- +Zb  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) 5c l%>U  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) fP1fm  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) %!)Dk<  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) k8"[)lDc.  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 'MIM_m)H  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) F ?TmOa0  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) >(a/K2$*1  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) g/soop\:  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) cY*lsBo  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) MT@Uu  
Age-standardized H=9\B}  
(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)  WR"p2=  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract zX/9^+p:  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Cqk6Igw  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 u8@>ThPD  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the M3 $MgsN:  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude meV RdQ  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the uw@|Y{(K r  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). tMy@'nj  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains c^8y/wfok  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban V|fs"HY  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than .oo>NS  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, VIxcyp0X  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in /P|jHK|{  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, Y,@{1X`0@3  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens +<H)DPG<  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. #y VY! +A  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable F 'U G p  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, vQ}llA h  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that oa|nQ`[  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Rj=xn(@d  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is OsR4oT  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted U{o0Posg  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement u-7/4Y)c  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We ;[@< ,  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction I%whM~M1+  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have JQ8wL _C>  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this mPxph>o  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their pRj1b^F5y  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants |L 4K#  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the (;'?56  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ T?c:z?j_9  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their }CA oB::&  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to l M5Xw  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change s7<x~v+^  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function =x~HcsJ8!R  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Llk4 =p  
overall quality of life.22 gfs?H#  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Z*QsDS  
significant posterior capsule opacification following (<pc4#B@*  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% jyf[O -  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated 0*q&)  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear }}v;V *_V  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an }Z- ]m  
opaque capsule. x(7K=K']  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and wz5xJ:Tj  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, mV} peb  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We T"XP`gk  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more #m6 eG&a  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is d$/BF&n  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 }\B`tAN  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any ` a5$VV%J  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of rE-Xv. |  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care 9Nglt3J[  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without }| _uqvin  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the $6T*\(;T@A  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated !q! =VC  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ._"U{ f2V  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ?ZDXT2b~~  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ,L^eD>|j5  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will  cpp0Y^  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the Sb+pB58&N  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in Y(ly0U}  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well M;={]w@n  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes _=XzQZT!L  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. 9`+c<j4/B  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract s (J,TS#I]  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for ^wCjMi(sj  
cataract extractions increases. 1Dg\\aUk  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS &aldnJ  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants P*XLm  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the s={AdQ  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell `h/j3fmX?  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 0F6^[osqtl  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient hV])\t=yf  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal oJbD|m  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. jzSh|a9_  
REFERENCES 2cr~/,YY  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. L"A ,7@:Vd  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. ")"VQ|$y  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, |\%[e@u  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population +^YXqOXU  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. tbF>"?FY/  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens R:P'QM   
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated #"fBF/Q  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. EFu2&P  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related -gefdx6ES  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. O7 %<(  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. "qjkw f)\  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye S(eCG2gR  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population O%;H#3kn&s  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: y{+$B Y$_  
363–71. ~q4KQ&.!  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. i,1=5@rw5  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye VliX'.-  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. %yX?4T;b  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. @H2c77%  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient (+ q#kKR  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. zgRZgVj  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. mIgc)"  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated l{ja2brX  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. _jg&}HM  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22.  B,@geJ  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 1$T;u~vg  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal nf=*KS\v  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: |b" h+  
77–80. @zo}#.g  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice l]t9*a]a  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? Xmr|k:z  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. A2>rS   
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest )a"rj5~-  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye </! `m8\  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic h!.#r*vV  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. C_xO k'091  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading !lxs1!:  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. C+ibLS4i  
82 McCarty et al. ${I$@qq83  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Ax p#8  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. :'1UX <&B  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume T,N"8N{K"  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International M]9oSi  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. lS1-e0,h1  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ~DY5`jV  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. hLF+_{\C|  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison '2)c;/-E  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 4cZig\mE;  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Arvxl(R\4  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. rb8c^u#r  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the MV8Lk/zd?A  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ^Ej4^d  
Organization, 1997. iV+'p->/  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, n =SY66  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation e|Ip7`  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. oh%kuO T[  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. ?Q$LIoR  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of \Xy]z  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative t:A,pT3  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. HbQv u@  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. *7`N^e  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated X`,4pS Q;  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.  ]J= S\  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. *~p~IX{  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract sOyWsXd+R'  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 8mjP 2  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. G5^gwG+  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. 7Pt*V@DHS  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to #xWC(*Ggp  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. to0tH^pD  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. ` eB-C//  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A 4fDo }~  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule dhW;|  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. o]NL_SM_  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. TO\%F}m(  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health S}"?#=Q.%O  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. -KRHcr \  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in h]Zc&&+8{  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, `1%SXP1  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract o3H+.u$  
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