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 *%Rmdyn  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes z&6_}{2,]  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 4j={ 9e<  
unoperated cataract in Australia. A S7L  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual { ADd[V  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than PVIOe}N  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination <tD,Uu {P  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography J$#T_4  )  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who 1Gsh%0r3  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater r fqwxr45h  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or `D4Wg<,9  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. (/A.,8Ad  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 6 9>@0P  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ^Hx}.?1  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria (!* l+}  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract "t0^4=c+7  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had l77 -I:  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 8 0tA5AP  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber Uu_qy(4  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber &;DCN  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated G"/;Cq=t  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or cXq9k!I%  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven Ok!P~2J  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate YK/? mj1x  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery [+\He/M6  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% $MR1 *_\V  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone 7h\is  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an &]TniQH  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision ?/.])'&b  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no x{pj`'J)  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural [j6]!p]S$  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance HhynU/36  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated <Y`(J#  
cataract. e|tx`yA  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is E-WpsNJ)X  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced x// uF  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of ^&;,n.X5Z  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes T6 /P54S  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. XJo.^<m  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ep8UWxB5  
services accessibility, prevalence 7&id(&y/  
INTRODUCTION 3HyOQD"{  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in "}X+vd``  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all y(DT ^>0  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate G&h@  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be NnAIL;WS  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 ! >F70  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting E]Mx<7;\ .  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is @G;9eh0$  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 6"_pCkn;c<  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists ,hf W2}  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather Ko&4{}/  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral %f<>Kwr`2  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has <<-L,0  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for %e[E@H7  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has t;+b*S6D  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 )&E]   
To appropriately plan health care services, information is yMdu Zmkc  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the nP[Z6h  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ]Sj;\Iz  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence :^W}$7$T  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors H*G(`Zl}  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to I Tl>HlS  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. "'t f]s  
METHODS ;i.MDW^N  
Study population GH':Yk  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual --diG$x.  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 +wz1kPRs  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to r<kgYU`  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. UU(Pg{DA 6  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of p5qfv>E8)  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen ^X6e\]yj  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites rMVcoO@3  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. [f\Jcjc  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 <V)z{uK  
Original Article .h4NG4FIF  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia t{B@k[|  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 5s\;7>  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia VMF?qT3Nd  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, &0f/ F:M  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au vCej( ))  
78 McCarty et al. +5  I5  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural a~@f,b w  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural #5h_{q4l  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify f99"~)B|  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a Py #EjF12  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of prt(xr4@  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, 3]'ab-,Vp  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of L<oQKe7Q:  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. (Z @dz  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local zqrqbqK5R  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. !w UznyYwt  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian Z" H;t\P  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. PA803R74  
Assessment of cataract huA?*fat   
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 2gklGDJD  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine &n8Ja@Y]  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the bBc<p{  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using Z'9|  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and <K&A/Ue  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on {[:C_Up)f  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) N LQ".mM+  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, Q jXJo$I6  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, [ *It' J^  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than N;YFr  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to w^zqYGxG)  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual 0+qC_ISns  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, e<{ d{  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. p),* 4@2<  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to 451.VI}MR  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the Kv!:2br  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight Iv3yDL;  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ct|0zl~  
analyses. @8`I!fZ  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., o ~y{9Q  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in b'SP,}s5"  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. aB (pdW4  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman ~vpF|4Zn5  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph mE{QTZS  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were T ?[;ej:  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera s&o9LdL  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 h*JN0O<b  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately d>I)_05t  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated T lyBpG=p  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies Z@x&  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were t 3N}):  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, 3 SbZD   
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph mh[,E8'd  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical w0nbL^f  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) z]%@r 7  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to rq7yN t  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. b p?TO]LH  
Assessment of risk factors 60%fva  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information H'k~;  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 L3Y2HZ  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration 2P'Vp7f6 Y  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, S/pU|zV[  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension euT=]j  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ?xMTO  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were BHgs,  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to =bJ$>Djp  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants BH^*K/ ^  
and use of vitamin supplements. Cpd>xXZz&S  
Data management and statistical analysis 0^J%&1aIc  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a a(O@E%|u  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 6K8v:yYPa  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or 6.45^'t]  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at uw8g%  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms bL0]Yuh  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and /#: *hn  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency jM6$R1HX  
checks were performed on the entire data set. OraT$lV)_  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was W"#<r  
employed for statistical analyses. < T.R%Jys  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ^qC.bv]&  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to og+Vrd  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five Bw`?zd\*  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates :u=y7[I  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific *Z.{1  
data were weighted according to the 1996 gV':Xe  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the t,XbF  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. L!/{ Z  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared 0VR,I{<.{  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated ;VCFDE{K=  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted .|L9 }<  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ' t(#HBU  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. bfJ<~ss/  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically #X!seQ7a  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 7{S;~VH3  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ,e`n2)  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment l_ x jsu  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with Z$Qwn  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence  UiK)m:NU  
limits. OaN"6Ge#  
RESULTS z'>b)wY](  
Study population UAI'tRY N_  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 6_9@s*=d>  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) @Y9tkJIt  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did rF?QI*`Y(  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ct(euPU  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as a[!:`o1U  
a whole. pnv)D} "  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to dt<P6pK-  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The #iD`Bg!VXc  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to {ueDwnZ  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural ldaT: er9  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) cSTL.QF  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 5]3Mj*u\  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery eM7 F8j  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 6k|f]BCL  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any shY8h   
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). sk t9mU  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three h)r=+Q\'(S  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence .36]>8  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes )o::~ eu  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% Ivq|-LDNc  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract u$"Ew^C  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract ?Bd6<F -G  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall soB_ j  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was Q A~Lm  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). }%,LV]rGEZ  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract $|19]3T@Z  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified lp1GK/!s  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated Ige*tOv2  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents X&%;(`  
as information about risk factor exposure was not $j0<ef!  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed zgSv -h+f  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence ","to  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic QLH6N mk  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a }Szs9-Wns  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use Qy'-3GB  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private )!l1   
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, KyzdJ^xC"  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. u< 5{H='6  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the aN"dk-eK  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having $&0\BvS  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract ia%U;M  
surgery were not available. SMHQh.O?5  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ~"U^N:I"  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had G -R E  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been P{>-MT2E  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment I !g+K  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant :>, m$XO  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression BGL-lJrG  
model. The factors that remained significantly related j:J7  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever YR0.m%U,  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been kwpbgQ  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Ku]<$uo  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate d /`d:g  
model. w O*x0$  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract )ZDqj  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 690;\O '  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 9 IY1"j0O  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort @" BkLF  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total r>7Dg~)V  
(years) (%) (%) (%) G297)MFF  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) 5,K*IH  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) }Uunlz<  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) JI[9c,N  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) &s_)|K  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) TWo.c _l  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) _ If:~mIs  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) 3v:c'R0  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ?M@ff0  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) XiN@$  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) s<fzk1LZ  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) E0<$zP}V}F  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) )w&k&TY4H  
Age-standardized >r5s>A[YC  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) z Ud{9B$  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 / WJ+e  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% - 4nSiI  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, _q1E4z  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). 56^#x  
Outcomes of cataract surgery tAH0o\1;  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior 3eJ"7sftW  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were t{Xf3.  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular \N"=qw^ t  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular ^%~ux0%^T  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact rk .tLk  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of [ nG@ 3n  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected *Z C$DW!-  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% KJ;NcUq  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes "Zq)y_1  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, m(?ZNtBQt  
P = 0.027). OVgx2_F  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Y;OqdO  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 2P4$^G[  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract DQRr(r~2Kj  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, ohj(1jt  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the [ [ ;vZ  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 =`%"-A  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this B2DWSp-8*  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four 8KhE`C9z  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these ( 17=|s  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction .|Zt&5osI  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one OD\F*Ry~  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract +X&b  
surgery. FSn&N2[D  
DISCUSSION <qpDAz4k  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically DEcsFC/SK  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract E |BE(F;K  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes 7xr@$-U  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual mcB8xE  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and \uT y\KA  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is O)E8'Oe"Q  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, E=9xiS  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract JL1z8Nu  
services throughout Australia.  edv&!  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age 8vL2<VT;  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is Sl RQi:  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous f8c '`$O  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye E"l/r4*f@  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract  1ae,s{|  
between studies because of different methodologies and VX<jg#(  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well tDk!]  
as the different age structures of the study populations. g* & |Eq/  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of c4'k-\JvT  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. v.Y?<=E+<d  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity hhU: nw  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. <HC5YA)4  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the x  #Um`  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. \(db1zmS~  
80 McCarty et al. ?"o7x[  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort e2 X\ll  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total -xXz}2S4  
(years) (%) (%) (%) &# ?2zbZ  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) +6$|No  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( k)t_U3i  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) H`:2J8   
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) abW[ hp  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) |*T3TsP u  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) B,_/'DneQK  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) h N5?u:  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) fQkfU;5  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) :Q=tGj\ G  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) D\ ;(BB  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) <U]!1  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 5!b+^UR;z  
Age-standardized ;Eer  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) {#_CzI.0f  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract (T9Q6 \sa  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. <*/IV<  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 cOq'MDr  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the <?&Y_  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude cUH. ^_a  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the o _G,Ph!7  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ]VCVV!G_=n  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ev'` K=n8  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ~\oF}7l$  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than +QZ}c@'r  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, I""zg^Rq  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in Sf>#Zqj/  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, y v58~w*"  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens u^4$<fd  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. JqmxS*_P  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 9 zL(PkC%\  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, $SOFq+-T  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that =] +owl2  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and ^cnTZzT#Q  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is _t/~C*=:=  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted ?]AF? 0/  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement JE * d-  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We zCe[+F  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction (k^o[HF  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have cFZcBiw  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this QG=K^g  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Xk hGU?={  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants rk-GQ#SKU  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the I'E7mb<2  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ M-8 `zA2  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their /os,s[w  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to aJ"m`5]=%  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change nCS" l5  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function oMNSQMlI  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in &\y`9QpVF  
overall quality of life.22 !+u K@z&G  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Ii&\LJ  
significant posterior capsule opacification following v{X<6^g  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% I<rT\':9  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated mKBO<l{S  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear EeR}34  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an }a%1$>sj  
opaque capsule. _CMNmmp`e  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and \^ 1S:z  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, ALQ-aXJ  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We E)`:sSd9  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more v!W{j&N  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is [w90gp1O[  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 :8`~dj.  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any U=WS ]  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of \U3v5|Q  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care CTS1."kx1  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without \n`/?\r.z  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the Z2t\4|wr:  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated & 'CUc/,  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 15S& ,$ 1&  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem u M\5GK  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract {_mVf FG  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will gyb99c,)  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the Bf.iRh0Q5  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in \wD L oR  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well <F8e? xy  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes jfiUf1Mj  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. ! B92W  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract !,dp/5 V  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for K iEmvC  
cataract extractions increases. 5rmU 9L  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  \_  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants | RXQ _|  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the zO---}[9a  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell sQJGwZ 7  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and |Iwglb!k  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient ="5D}%  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal @({=~ W^  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 3%bhW9H%  
REFERENCES d!UxFY@  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 0>8w On  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. /y$Fw9R;  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, 6UqAs<c9  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population x+j@YWDpG"  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. 2Kf/Id1  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens &y}7AV  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 9=~ZA{0J  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 8}m J )9<7  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related tsJR:~  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. +C8O"  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. rVqQo` K\  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye s~].iQJ{B  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population y]0O"X-G  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 4"k&9+>  
363–71. /wLGf]0  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. #|ts1lD#ah  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye T{k_3[{0o  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. l)vC=V6MG  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. CYLab5A  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient HoABo:  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. U8 Zb&6  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. (<r)xkn  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated hN M8H  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. dazNw n  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. "t&=~eOe3  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 9L:wfg}8s  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 6X*vCylI  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 3e&+[j  
77–80. NgDhd OB  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice |@iM(MM[?  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ~ tA ^K  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 7b[s W|{  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest P!W%KobZ7|  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye Y7.+ Ma#|  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic qU !dg  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. 6}TunR  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading dn#I,xa`  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. >+a\BK"k  
82 McCarty et al. ?>h ~"D#  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & o'#& =h$_  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. ._G ,uP$  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 5v)^4( )  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International L;RE5YrH%6  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. >[;W ~*  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and _ p\L,No  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. !i;6!w  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison P\j\p =  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased eTa_RO,x  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment ]%E h"   
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. =wh[D$n$~  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the 4/b.;$  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health `j>5W<5q\  
Organization, 1997. #hxYB  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, Xf`e 4  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation G!Zb27u+  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. Vgm'&YT  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. sF {,n0<8  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of b(0<,r8  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 62sl6WWS3  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. zKd@Ab  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. U!(.i1^n  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated zV&l^.  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. `MU~N_  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. .?45:Ey~g  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract [Z$H <m{c-  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and B->AY.&j  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. ''nOXl  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. ?@'&<o0p#  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to RCWmdR#}V  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. >jI.$%L$  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. sy"}25s  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A MKBDWLCB  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule JXc.?{LL  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ,Pa*; o\  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. `==l 2AX  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health y \skke]  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. aZmN(AJ8v  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in &r1(1<  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, "`% ,l|D  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract Cab.a)o  
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