加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT l7Y^C1hM  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes WZ&/l 65J  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to "ZE JL.Wy  
unoperated cataract in Australia. _tS<\zy@y  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 6Ii2rEzD  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than 1wmS?  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination i >Hh_q;'  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography d i`}Y&  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who _Sj S^z~  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater J\b,rOIf  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 5F+5J)h  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. Mii-Q`.:  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne FjRJSMwO,  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 k$y(H;XA  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria  V7 %G?  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract {6^c3R[  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had HWT0oh]  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 >~_y\  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber Ij(S"P@  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 90|p]I%  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated d*,% -Io  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Z^`&Z3s  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven !I-+wc{ss  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate U2 <*BRJ  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery iN8?~T}w  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% eW"i'\`0  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone  ^ 'FC.  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an GRCc<TM, U  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision Y;6<AIx>  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no [&| Le;h  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural @;qC % +^  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance jFM8dl n  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated _s><>LH~  
cataract. sSd  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is >hoIJZP,  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced gGw6c" FRQ  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of Fx4C]S  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes jV\M`=4IC  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 33J}AK^FE  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health RKdf1C  
services accessibility, prevalence ?=jmyDXH!  
INTRODUCTION =x> z|1  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in {k1s@KXtd  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all SW (7!`  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Oh6;o1UI  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be B7nMy oj  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 5IW^^<kiu  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting [P OcO  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is to[EA6J8l  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in daWmF  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 75K~ebRr  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather q?[{fcNh$  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ^c< <I-o|  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has $^IuE0.  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for idGkX ?  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has UL; d H  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ^%M!!wlUH  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is ZgtW  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the |?s%8c'w=  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ?8-e@/E#x  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence YM3o qS D  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors 6TfL|W<  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to  1k2Ck  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. eQcy'GA06  
METHODS H b]    
Study population 1dfA 8=L,s  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual s?~Abj_  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 TT .EQv5  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to R{!s%K&  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. U~Ni2|}\C9  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 85 "DS-+e  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen /,Ln)?eD  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites  =!U{vT  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. rcxV ,<[B  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 kt[#@M!}  
Original Article '  AeU  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ji A$6dZU  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD jt3s;U*  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia y>~=o9J_u  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, jJ55Az?t:  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au b\=0[kBQw  
78 McCarty et al. C9gF2ii|?  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural (d#?\  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural D-ug$ZRg  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify ,:>>04O  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a 2Q9s?C   
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of _<t3~{qUT  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, 71K6] ~<  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ~JC``&6E=}  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.  M?}2  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local >kC@7h5)  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. wfo}TGhC  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian m?[F)<~a  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. ^4s#nf:}  
Assessment of cataract '?3Hy|}  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 2jx""{  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine :+E>Uz T  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the P Cw.NJd$  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using LgBs<2  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and <6(u%t0k5  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on  |2n2  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) ge[ \%  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, &X|z(vSJ$  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 6 _73  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than l8^^ O   
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to .Ta$@sPh}  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual 1 #EmZ{*  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, !_x-aro3<  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ]t #,{%h  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to yP-.8[;  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the DbOWnXV"o  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight [k1N`K(M  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ]^ j)4us  
analyses. CrqWlO  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., u9VJ{F  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in T[<9Ty'^  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. N'[^n,\(:  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman DoImWNLo  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph '<XG@L  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were bNc=}^  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ;itz` 9T  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 }dB01Jl '  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately iCw~4KG  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated %Xp}d5-  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies ,T1 t`  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were X0 %k`3  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, seq S*^7  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph [qid4S~r,&  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical T.&^1qWWA  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 8|i&Gbw+  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to hEEbH@b  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. <L5[#V_  
Assessment of risk factors BBy/b c!  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information *[_?4*F  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 v( (fRX.`  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration YFs EuaV  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, )!M:=}."  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension )e{~x u  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and  H\)on"  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were tQUp1i{j\  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to [h,T.zpa  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants ##yi^;3Y  
and use of vitamin supplements. VN;Sz,1Z  
Data management and statistical analysis TX8,+s+  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a gxL5%:@  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, HtS:'~DYo  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or spn1Ji  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at l<^#@SH  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms [O(78n$$  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and /[_>U{~P#  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency {w{|y[[d~  
checks were performed on the entire data set. l=bB,7gL  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was sx(yG9  
employed for statistical analyses. Z/56JYt!~  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific js7J#b7  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to UZ&bT'>;9g  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five Z\O , 9  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates ^vo^W:   
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific pD.7ib^  
data were weighted according to the 1996 (zye Ch  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the jw#'f%*  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. /3rt]h"  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared WynH cxC  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated -\AB!#fh  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted (a]'}c$X9`  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the . |KxQn}  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. OFCkQEG=y>  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically A3yVT8  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 6$ @Pk<w  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The BI,K?D&W-  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment #`v`e"  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with yBht4"\Al  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence >x&$lT{OY  
limits. tkV:kh< L~  
RESULTS Lg_y1Mu7o  
Study population % NX  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 k s sXi6^  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) :h*20iP  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did 9j$ OU@N 8  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was FhAuTZk  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as 6DR@$fpt  
a whole. Pw hs`YGMF  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to DV*8Mkzg  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 6bo,x  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to nLQ 3s3@1>  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural z=BX-)  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) DU]MMR  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 2,q^O3F  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery p0`Wci  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases z`>a,X  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any 'rp(k\ pY  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). qJ#?= ITE  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three X \X  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence 5j{o0&=_$  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 2frJSV?  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%  L~I<y;x  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract &Vvy`JE  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract (RWZ [-;)  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall P}DrUND  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was "g>uNtt~  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). XrFyN(p  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract `lN1u'(:  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified p^5B_r:  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 0wAZ9AxA{  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents sZ]O&Za~  
as information about risk factor exposure was not Dn<2.!ZKQ  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed  ItC*[  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence IOvYvFUUJ  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic +g7Iu! cA  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a K34ca-~  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use _+z@Qn?#6h  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private L4 x  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, \eI )(,A  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. < LzN/I aJ  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the 9]1-J5iO  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 8kH'ai  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract F{bET  
surgery were not available. #++MoW}'g  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate "aB]?4  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had h9>~?1$lz  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been H]}Iw5Z  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 04WKAP'c N  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant p9oru0q  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression :pDwg d  
model. The factors that remained significantly related DK*2 d_  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever  vRn^n  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been < ynm A  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors 7{. "Y@  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate %mtW-drv>  
model. '#u |RsZ  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract y9Yh%M(  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with L7q%u.nB1  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 c}g^wLa  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort hb_YdnG  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total kp xd+w  
(years) (%) (%) (%) Ct$e`H!;  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) &qMSJ  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) W O|2x0K  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) @xSS`&b  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) k2 k/v[60  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) _d %H;<_  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) l')?w]|  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) w KXKc\r  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) wEQV"I  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) t9Pu:B6  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) i/-Xpj]Zf  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) PZeVjL?E  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ^3*/x%A,g  
Age-standardized )z2Tm4>iql  
(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) r,L#JR w#-  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 (NScG[$}  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% iW.8+?Xq&  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, {-7];e  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). T% Kj >-  
Outcomes of cataract surgery d]0fgwwGC  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior #wk'&XsC#z  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were "_}Hzpy5k  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular  Q.DtC  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular UfOF's_'<  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact st +X~;PX*  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of ]Tx8ImD#)A  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected sn}U4=u  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% ;rV0  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes z,X ^;  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, Yvs9)g  
P = 0.027). _;G"{e.=  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity iVFHr<zk  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without :G9.}VrU  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract Tm.(gK  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, .px*.e s  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the M$FQoRwH  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 J 2v=b?NE  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this RI')iz?  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four rk-}@vp  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these kK16+`\+  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction B&0-~o3WP  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one B+`m  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract ]$EKowi  
surgery. V+nqQ~pJ&  
DISCUSSION I o|NL6[  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically `-hFk88  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract <ij;^ygYD  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes c}U&!R2p{  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual C8 m8ys  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and E@}t1!E<  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is #6 e  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, u#/Y<1gn  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract %i]q} M  
services throughout Australia. g|9' Lk  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age 8*V3g_z  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is -|~6Zf"  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 4l@*x^F  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye Ep|W>  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract K=;z&E=<c  
between studies because of different methodologies and l`:M/z6"  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well ;_@u@$=~  
as the different age structures of the study populations. qSlC@@.>  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of fLa 7d?4  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. npkE [JE:  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity E EEYNu/4/  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. : P>Wd3m  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the OxqK} %=Bw  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. zF[kb%o  
80 McCarty et al. h\Ck""&  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort U;<07 aMj  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total h2# G  
(years) (%) (%) (%) lEL&tZ}  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) @" UoQ_h%  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( Cu3^de@h  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) _Qs=v0B//  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) Q&}`( ]k  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) p&/}0eL y  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) R=yn4>I  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) p^_2]%,QeM  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ?x u5/r<  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) -. ~Dhk  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) y=_8ae}aD~  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ~:~-AXaMT  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 4loG$l+a1  
Age-standardized 'B ocMjRA  
(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) 0l=g$G \%  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract G9J+D?'hH  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. P~/Gla k  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 :_E=&4&g  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the s 4uZ;  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude MwMv[];I  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the T{-<G13  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). qT7E"|.$  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains T|RW-i3  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ?.Z4GWyXa  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than Khp`KPxz%  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, |zhVl  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in R+ #(\  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, 32j@6!  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 3~v' Ev  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. oRmz'F  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable qk !")t  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, !jZX h1g%  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that E{+V_.tlu  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and zQvp<IUq  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is + q@kRQY;n  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted ^PHWUb+``  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement NbG`v@yH  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 4E\Jk5co,  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction !##OQ  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have +*/XfPlr|  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this <Sw>5M!j  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their <*I%U]  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants lxsBXXZg  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the `x%( n@g  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ aN n\URR  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their ;.Dm?J0  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to o1I8l7  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change dk}T&qZ~p  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function :mOHR&2xR%  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in 'L$%)`;e  
overall quality of life.22 yffg_^fR  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually x""gZzJ$L  
significant posterior capsule opacification following yMz%s=rh  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% !yxb=>A  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated ZY N HVR  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear /"$A?}V  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an ~o"VZp  
opaque capsule. (- ]A1WQ?  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and bo>4:i  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, ji'NR  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We @D:$~4ks  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more S(bYN[U  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is 2h Wtpus  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 LI`L!6^l  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any }ZPO^4H;-  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 99xs5!4s  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ui _nvD:  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without 5X8GR5P  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the oRJ!J-Z]  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated soSdlV{  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. P~"e=NL5  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 2.xA' \M  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 1=R6||8ws  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will LYYz =gvZl  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the `>.^/SGu>?  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in rGNYu\\  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well |$hBYw  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes ,RP"m#l!\  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. LIm{Y`XU  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract `a$c6^a  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for PT t#Ixn,  
cataract extractions increases. REEs}88);'  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2 %`~DVo  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants :TPT]q d@  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the pJnT \~o  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 6"OwrJB  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and yniXb2iM  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 1KHFzx,  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal ?2RDd|#  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. A s5*)o"&  
REFERENCES PG51+#  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. ){D 6E9  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. bi@z<Xm%  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ?j'Nx_RoX  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population y}\d]*5  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. `FJ2 ?  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens $u ae8h  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated y TbOBl  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. |.ZYY(}  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ?W27 h  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. zUQn*Cio e  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. =ws iC'  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye e >6 NO  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population dE_ d.[!  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: qV7F=1k]  
363–71. B$\,l.h E  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. o/J2BZ<_<  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye WDF;`o*3  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 4#MPD  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. \nzaF4+$  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient mw!EDJ;'  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. (O(X k+L  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. .='hYe.  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated m4m,-}KNi  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. ; *ZiH%q,  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 9w:F_gr  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too A8zh27[w%  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal myvn@OsEw  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: &*\-4)Tf  
77–80. -#y^$$i0  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice "J=A(w5   
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ;+Sc Vz  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. RAs5<US:  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest ;;]^d_  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye U#mrbW  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic ]nQC  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. -]-?>gkN5  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading * ak"}s  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. a{y"vVQOF  
82 McCarty et al. bkSI1m3  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & ln*_mM/Q%  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. OGGuVY  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume %I^y@2A4`  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International [CAV"u)0  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. )2Dm{T  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and (\A~SKEX  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. AZ'"Ua  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison .CAcG"42  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased =AVr<kP  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment bi<?m^j  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 24 L =v  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the d~za%2{  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ]*\m@lWu  
Organization, 1997. #$*l#j"#A  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, n^+rxG6 L  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation i3usZ{_r  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. s<`54o ,  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. SBog7An9SI  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 9+"\7MHw  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative  1(*Pa  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. ^Ss4<  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. pU)g93  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated hn p-x3  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 18{" @<wIs  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. vb1Gz]~)>  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract ^cz;UQX~}  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and [pgld9To  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. 6d%'>^`(o-  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. <&Q(I+^  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to _5l3e7YN  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. %^VQw!  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. TexSUtx@$  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A mok%TK  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule 7Ew.6!s#n1  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. I,0Z* rw  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Ei & Z  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ocbNf'W;  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. #Emz9qTsce  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in @*{sj`AS '  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, (}:n#|,{M  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract qZ79IX'y  
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