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 d?qz7#kc  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes 8iB}a\]B  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to p- _j0zv  
unoperated cataract in Australia. *G38N]|u6  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual UgJHSl  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than uq_SF.a'v  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination :4dili4|/  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography {zcjTJ=Zt8  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who hB4.tMgZ  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater <dZ{E7l  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 6 s/O\A  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. m[XN,IE#u  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne R_&>iu'[  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 t+VPX2  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 4KKNw9L)  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 6)8']f  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 4C$,X!kzF  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 J&?kezs  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber  i.]}ooI  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber l#Tm `br  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated &*}S 0  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or F&\o1g-L  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven h0`) =  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate K{c^.&6D  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery [O3R(`<e5  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% `u-}E9{  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone z"-Urd^O  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an W$&Q.Z  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision X*sF-T$.  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no e1#}/U  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural -%A6eRShk  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance psMagzr&)e  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated  _R ]1J0  
cataract. REw3>/=  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is k $);<= ZI  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced h ( Z7a%_  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of ecb[m2z  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes zUh(b= ,  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ]KfHuYjM  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health Ai/#C$MY$  
services accessibility, prevalence -{O2Nv-]]  
INTRODUCTION E?;W@MJi  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in h1BdASn_  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 9(C Ke,  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate W&"FejD  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be qP"m819m  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 XhS<GF%  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting (<f[$ |%  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is xGA%/dy,;  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 29E^]IL?  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists F8pLA@7[  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather F 4k`x/ak  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ,e;(\t:  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has )qKfTt N`  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for 7~IAgjo,@  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has q H+~rj  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 j3FDGDrg  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is lAoH@+dyA+  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the ?(mlt"tPk  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract G6I>Ry[2?  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence O|8p #  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Kj'uTEM  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to j/9'L^]  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. d`Wd"LJ=  
METHODS YpAjZQZ,  
Study population (_d^i Zyf  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual .~Td /o7  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 h'wI/Z_'  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to &u.t5m7(  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. GUMO;rZs  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ab6KK$s  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen gi~*1RIel;  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites :]:q=1;c  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. hH%@8'1v  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 Z:5e:M  
Original Article zU]95I  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ,zO!`|I  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 3PPN_Z  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia ]M#_o]  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, yyG:Kl  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au O TSbhI'v  
78 McCarty et al. |s=)*DZv  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural ]Z6==+mCP  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural %i$]S`A}  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify bfhap(F~(e  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a fp u^  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of UhXZ^ k3  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, ?o?~Df&  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Y2HF  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Jwgd9a5  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local } U\n:@:2B  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. #[ipJ %  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian )w=ehjV^m  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. .Xqe]cax%  
Assessment of cataract GB&<+5t2  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after -YPUrU[)  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine 7&-B6Y4  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ;%{REa  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using Db3# ;  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and C5"=%v[gQv  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on xJlf}LEyF  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) _=S 4H  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, _[SW89zk  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, {$5?[KD  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than cdY|z]B  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to FX}kH]  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual rlV:% k  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, EVYICR5g  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. tX)l_ ?jVH  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to u]RI,3Z  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the AYb-BaIc  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight T8'm{[C  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ^V,?n@c!  
analyses. oU"!"t  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., >JVdL\3  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in !79eF)  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. b%A+k"d  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman }3HN $Fwo  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph .! 'SG6 q  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were VO u/9]a  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera Q>d<4]`  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 |tn.ZEgw3~  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately X?f\j"v  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated ; ,9:1.L  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies s]X0} "cz  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were HAKB@h)  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, j;TXZ`|(  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph W *.j=?)\[  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical G1tua"Px  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) "Sb<"$ :  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to y\?NB:=%  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. IEmjWw4  
Assessment of risk factors aWS_z6[t#6  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information i U"2uLgb  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 W6^YFN  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration yt+d f0l  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, u; G-46  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension y?P4EVknM3  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ,II-:&H  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were taBCE?{  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to WJU[+|J  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants IRG-H!FV  
and use of vitamin supplements. iy-~CPNB_  
Data management and statistical analysis [cso$T v  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a wNm1H[{  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, Xn6'*u>+;[  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or wX+KW0|>  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at >(He,o@M  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms l1 UN.l'p  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and }cO}H2m  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency 68QA%m'J  
checks were performed on the entire data set. \5DOp-2  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was vYNu=vnM  
employed for statistical analyses. .azA1@V|  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ,V`[;~49  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to ? t_$C,A+  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five eh /QFm 4  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates }J+ \o~  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific oGKk2oP  
data were weighted according to the 1996 - p*j9 z  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the $.KD nl^  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. _ipY;  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ?TMrnR/d  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated h e1=  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted eUEO~M2&U{  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ;oivG)hJl  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. U}:e-   
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically E3 d# T  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use R d:wMy$  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ^nN@@ \-5  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment @f%q ,:  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with M&ec%<lM  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Y N*"q'Yz_  
limits. s^>1rV]=(`  
RESULTS m$H(l4wB>  
Study population R6E.C!EI  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 "2>_eZ#b  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) %Kc2n9W  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did ~]C m   
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 3fhlMOm  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as 7!jb ID~  
a whole. rF)[ Sed:T  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to kdp- |9  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The &pEr;:E  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to HN~  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 5|Hz$oU  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) /p7-D;  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. WN9K*Tt~o&  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery {n-6e[  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases Hl b%/&  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any jyFXAs2  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). 1jkMje  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three (^ ;Fyf/  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence CI~ll=9`  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes #b5V/)K  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% U]W+ers  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract 7FvtWE*  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract TYN~c(  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall #t?tt,nc}  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was 3PgiV%]  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). -9> oB  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract 9~6)u=4sS"  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified *g~\lFX,u  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated \'.#of  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents ^L +@oS  
as information about risk factor exposure was not +ht{ARX2(  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed CF_pIfbaf  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence / +9o?Kxya  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic \g<=n&S?  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a L-QzC<[F/  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use >YuiCf?c7  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 6|AD]/t^K  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, YN V4'  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. iw)^; 8q  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the M PI=^rc2  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 'I8K1Q=/  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract Ihn+_H u  
surgery were not available. /swNhDQ"o  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate u[;,~eB%w  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ~qj09  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been H(WRm1i"G  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment z-X_O32  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant `7mRUDz  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression <JNiW8 PG  
model. The factors that remained significantly related / Hg/)  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever MzudCMF  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been \8e27#PJR  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors @fz!]/  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate  s%c>Ge  
model. 7\xGMC ctM  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract . vJlTg  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with !CO1I-yL  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 i`hr'}x  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort UB Z37P  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total 2MQ XtK  
(years) (%) (%) (%) *eLKD_D`!C  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) t6JM%  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) jqeR{yo&0b  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ooW;s<6  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) UG5AF Z\  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) QO&{Jx.^[  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) V@C8HTg  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) ^/V>^9CZ  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) bCbpJZ  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 9>I&Z8J$M  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 7kDqgod^A  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) )A1u uW (  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) Wp2$L-T&$  
Age-standardized `k]2*$%  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) &h<\jqN/  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 \fD)|   
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% BJNZH#"  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, JOUZ"^v  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). `$oy4lDKQ  
Outcomes of cataract surgery m*f"Y"B.1I  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior JV`"kk/  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were pg9 feIW1  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular lh`ZEvt  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular ZR8%h<  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact ]]^r)&pox  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of _fM=J+  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected o#\c:D*k  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% 3\2^LILLO  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes k@ So l6  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, TR&7AiqB  
P = 0.027). %$6?em_  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity ZU68\cL  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 7:'5q]9  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract :2*0Jh3_  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, P/,ezVb =  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the oEJxey]B7  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 =: =s  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this XE S$V15  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four q"-+`;^7(-  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these orZwm9#].  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction _+ERX[i  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one ?.g="{5X  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract (gEz<}Av.  
surgery. f3SAK!V+s  
DISCUSSION 4bq+(CI6  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically *t bgIW+h  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract "Z#MR`;&29  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes p]Q(Z  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual = zRjb>  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 1>)uI@?Rb  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is ^:2>I$  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, ]D@y""{--s  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 6#Bg99c  
services throughout Australia. IF kU8EK&B  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age =`t%p1   
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is )%bY2 pk  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous xz){RkVzP  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye mU;\,96#  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 2l}3L  
between studies because of different methodologies and EoOw u-{  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well WO+_ |*&  
as the different age structures of the study populations. Jm3iYR+,  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of .] BJM?9  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. jEW@~e  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity q&V=A[<rz  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. L7B(abT9e  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the 9 [wR/8Xm  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. !;. nL-NQ  
80 McCarty et al. $qk(yzY  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort oT[8Iu  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total _.BX#BIF  
(years) (%) (%) (%) E{E%nXR)  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) B#K 2?Et!t  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( y0cB@pWp  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) e]u3[ao  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) |d=MX>i|G  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) #AUa'qB t  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) Xw<Nnvz6  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) qY%{c-aMA  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) uNG?`>4>  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) Zn"1qLPF  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) e X q}0-*f  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Dv[ 35[Yh  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) l/@t>%  
Age-standardized b+ J)  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) w65D;9/;  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract {;XO'  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. l]v>PIh~N  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 -%t2_g,  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 0s8w)%4$  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude pt+[BF6P  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 2q ,> *B?  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 7iBN!"G0  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains 9Lv"|S`5W_  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ESt@%7.F  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than Zjx:1c= b  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, v\:P _J  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in /htM/pR  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, mh=YrDU+L  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 8RJ^e[?o(  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. xf ]_@T;  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 8e3I@mv  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 8Cw+<A*  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that v8!Ts"  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and #N'W+M /  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is  N\9 Wxz$  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted =xq+r]g6  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement r1)@ 7Nt  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We fyE#8h_>4  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction OW|5IEC  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have yhpeP  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this at-+%e  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their `oq][|  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 9Oe~e  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the @ysc?4% q  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ Z.D O 2=+=  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their OmR) W'  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to p2/Pj)2  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change GZwz4=`  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function 6S GV}dAx  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in t.`&Q|a  
overall quality of life.22 :K)7_]y  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually .*(xkJI3  
significant posterior capsule opacification following r$ 8 ^K\oF  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 3\B 28m  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated -0>gq$/N=^  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear f"}g5eg+  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an NlG~{rfI  
opaque capsule. Ump$N#  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and O8Dav^\y?  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 7H l>UX,|  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We L]kd.JJvy  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more wJ%;\06  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Z.l4<  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 9-3, DxZ}  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any d^(7\lw |  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of l{o,"P"  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care !ay:h Iv  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without ~9[O'  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the u _mtdB'  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 2t[P-on  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ki6L t  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem zo| '  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 4'wbtE|  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will mfqnRPZ  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the L~+/LV  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in @u @~gEt  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well d@XXqCR<  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes Fd86P.Df  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. { MV,>T_  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract Kcvst C`  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for AxtmG\o>  
cataract extractions increases. 7 'q *(v  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2{Y~jYt{h  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants m{;j r<  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the -|GKtZ]}  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell RY .@_{  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and I`f5)iF?0  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient GEK7q<  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal ZZn$N-  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. c'.XC}  
REFERENCES L^jjf8_  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. %s! |,Cu  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. e }Mf  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, C-@[=  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population oY4^CGk=  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. >UQY3C  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens Mg~4) DW]  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated g/FZ?Wo  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. VsJiE0'%  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related 5X f]j=_  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. QC?~$>h!?  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. f14^VTzP/#  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye /5<=m:  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population 1uO2I&B  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: DXo]O}VF  
363–71. hrm<!uKn  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. qJag>OY  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ME$J42  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. drMMf[  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. @0 'U p  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 9b/Dswxjx  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Q6W![571;  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. {#ynN`tLyF  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated +SR{ FF  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. |mP};&b  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. V^,eW!  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too +U1 Ir5Lx  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal j)2I+[aoB  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: qa-FLUkIk!  
77–80. SIV !8mz  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice KW(a@X  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ?+))J~@t  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. g_1#if&  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest  ]'`E  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye G0{Z@CvO'  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic : oXSh;\  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ~%8P0AP  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading )-26(aNGT  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. !JDr58  
82 McCarty et al. Xva(R<W7d<  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & g5|~ i{"0  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. \y5lYb,*c_  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume !,$#i  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International ]*#i_dho7  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. =3 .dgtH  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and Tb$))O}  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 9h amxi  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison lN#j%0MaUo  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased /)6T>/  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment :$$~$P  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. =mO5~~"W+v  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the c,xdkiy3  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health UZI:st   
Organization, 1997. ]>1Mq,!  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO,  y:RW:D&  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation xoKK{&J  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. k( :Bl  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. s<zN`&t  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 8ttJ\m  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative e,JBz~CK*w  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. \>6*U r  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. ~#E&E%sJ  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ,<U= 7<NU  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ,D;8~l lM  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31.  Zi~.  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract K=N&kda   
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and m^QoB  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. C ~h#pAh  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. JTKS5 r7?  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to %unn{92)  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. =MqEbQn{C3  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. -s 0SQe{!_  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A rN&fFI  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule CH4Nz'X2  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ! v![K  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. ?Z{/0X)]|  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health i3)3. WK^  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. q]="ek&_  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in Z?eTjkNS#  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, "q?(rx;  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract dEDhdF#f  
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