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 $-*!pRaVU  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes }:~x7|~s:  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to l c '=mA  
unoperated cataract in Australia. #&7}-"Nd  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Xqm::1(-(  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ^R@j=_8}  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination b 'pOJS  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography qhz]Wm P   
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who smDw<slC  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ]]wA[c~G  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 5>\/[I/!  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. JC3m.)/  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne <z!CDg4  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 6<ZkJ:=  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria aW Y gR  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract d|yAs5@  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had CtSl  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 5)MS~ii  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber ixT:)|'i  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber XUlS\CH@{  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Ub * wuI  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or | ]X  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven ]f({`&K5  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate iB& 4>+N+  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery x" L20}  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%  D 'Zt  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone ptZ <ow&  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an tyqT  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision dKxyA"@  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no bq:(u4 3  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural z3;*Em8Ir  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance n$ou- Q  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated S-|)QGxV6  
cataract. S_IUV)  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is :dQ B R  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced mh{1*T$fP  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of <,e+ kL {  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes U5.LDv;  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 0p}D(m2B  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health Pf\D-1gi  
services accessibility, prevalence k@3Q|na  
INTRODUCTION Z*= $8 e@  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in =aBctd:eX`  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all t~#zMUfac  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate O%5 r[  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be sEGO2xeI  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 hUp.tK:X7o  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting [k;\SXDZo  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 9{5&^RbCp  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in |m^k_d!d  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists nwF2aR NV  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather =pS5uR~  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral v{ 0=  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has lrI S{MJ+-  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for A|X">,A  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has yl7&5)b#9  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 d\R,Q  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is CkoL TY  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the ZK@N5/H(  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract 8TLgNQP  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence CzRc%%BA  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors 8o '_`{ba  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to gT0BkwIV  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. i*Sqda $  
METHODS b`~p.c%(  
Study population Z7hgA-t  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual XBb~\p 3y  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 MHX?@. v  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to x7jC)M<k0  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. YkniiB[/  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of a1+#3X.  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen _m gHJ0v'  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 'rO!AcdLU  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. $RIecv<e_  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 @|63K)Xy  
Original Article qln3 k`  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia c#Sa]n  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD GT}F9F~  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia E_])E`BJ  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, w$z}r  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au X(]WVCu  
78 McCarty et al. v/68*,z[  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural h_:C+)13`x  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural Q<^Tl(`/N?  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify z(_Ss@ $  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a bx{$Y_L+p  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of E:JJ3X|  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, =vDEfO/T  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of a(kg/s  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. (@<lRA ^  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local ysxb?6  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 0- HqPdjR  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian n>+mL"hs  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. \Xm,OE_v"  
Assessment of cataract 4zev^FR  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after L+Xc-uv["p  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine AsAT_yv#  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ej4W{IN~:  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using l6YtEHNG  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and cC=[Saatsf  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on P `}zlml  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) |Y$uqRdV  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, M m[4yP%  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, Pz>s6 [ob  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than YQ+tDZY8`  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to x_| UPF  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual @.b+av4J  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, //T>G_1  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. U=DmsnD,  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to  J7=+  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the A?CcHw rT  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight < ,Ue 0  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the |uqf:V`z:  
analyses. $FlW1E j  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., 'MEz|Z  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 0y 7"SiFY  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. ;3d"wW]}7K  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman i`Q KH  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph P;P%n  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were X 9p.gXF  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera )-0kb~;|  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 2 "Ecd  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately kSR\RuY*  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated xl6,s>ob  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies +V m}E 0Ov  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were tE@;X=  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, A*2  bA  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph ] 8Q4B W  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical >#hO).`C  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)  @2Z#x  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to DE%KW:Hug  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. S/D^  
Assessment of risk factors in~D  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information )3~{L;q  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 1#.>a$>  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration |&FkksNAl\  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, c lNkph  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension *^f<W6xc  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and 'yL%3h _@  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were BReJ!|{m}  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to h{AII  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 2 dAB-d:k  
and use of vitamin supplements. T(t+ iv  
Data management and statistical analysis xL{a  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a yp$_/p O=2  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, MrDc$p W G  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or m|{3),#V  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at c&AygqN  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms cFeXpj?GV  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and .u4 W /  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Fxm$9(Y  
checks were performed on the entire data set. CaL\fZ  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was 1XD,uoxB  
employed for statistical analyses. qWODs  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ;`^WGS(3.%  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to ly:q6i  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five W3 'q\+  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates i70w rW#k  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 1(|'WyD  
data were weighted according to the 1996 PK0%g$0  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the FQqI<6;  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. /+@p7FqlE  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared X4 A<[&F/  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated Bh;7C@dq  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted UE$UR#T'w  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the cVv;Jn  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. =y0C 1LD+  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically no< ^f]33  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use |Z=^`J  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The .6`9H 1  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment i 7x7xtq  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ug+io mZ  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence f!!V${)X  
limits. A?-oL='  
RESULTS YKO){f5  
Study population `Ye\p6v!+  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 <gJ U?$  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) }j*KcB_  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did qoj$]   
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ]3KhgK%c8  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as S$Q8>u6Wk  
a whole. eC[$B99\  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to %we u 1f  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The V>A .iim  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to -3;*K4z$/  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural S5G6Rj@W  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) |aT| l^2R@  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. f"u%J/e&  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 11<KpxKpk  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases b+f'[;  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any D (h18  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). X!m9lV<  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three DRc)iE>@  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence ($}`R xj1@  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes  Fl1;;F  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% O }(VlR2  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract F@<CsgKB-  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract h\P HK C2  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall br dmz}  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was m"o ;L3  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). /C4^<k\  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract _ B 5gR  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified Dg} Ka7H  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated j& <i&  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents XwlbJ=mf  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 4( 1(e  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed _ h": >  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence #_(jS+lP?k  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic %"af748!+D  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a T+<A`k: -  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use .F(i/)vaq|  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private ])Qs{hs~s  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, "sl1vzRN  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. bf!M#QOk?  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the R hvfC5Hq  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having Ie4hhW  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract 9> g,  
surgery were not available. ?zsB6B?;  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate Jte#ZnP  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had zBJ7(zh!  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been o`q_wdy?  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment C,p J`:P  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant ^+m+zd_  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression j~e;DO  
model. The factors that remained significantly related GKFq+]W  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever P b]3&!a  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been %bD }m!  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors = pzn u+,  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate \a=D  
model. 2d {y M(=(  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract q=DN {a:  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with V2<?ol  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 EgDQ+( -  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort a<A+4uXyD  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total His*t1o8'O  
(years) (%) (%) (%) if]Noe  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) G_dsrpI=N  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) }irn'`I  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 5zIAhg@o:q  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 5&e<#"  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) ) 9oH,gZ  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) brZ sA Q+k  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) 4 8{vE3JY  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) 3tmdi3s  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) c.A|Ir  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) nWvuaQ0}  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) \G2B?>E;  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) LjH*rjS4  
Age-standardized wM _ 6{  
(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) ,o7hk{fR*  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 :SsUdIX;P  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% c0Dmq)HK?  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, & ``d  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). K A276#  
Outcomes of cataract surgery $) 5Bf3P0  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior 1[*{(e  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were R <"6ojn  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular M@thI%lR  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular =]>NDWqpHN  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Xm4CKuU@  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of %ObD2)s6:^  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected  pAu72O?  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% ]p~IYNl2%j  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes T|"7sPgGR  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, =_[Z W  
P = 0.027). - ~4+w  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 6TH!vuQ1(  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without K"2|[5  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract G]Jz"xH#  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, g8'DoHJ*  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the |8)Xc=Hz  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 ^\:2}4Uj_  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this )uLr?$qe  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four +/?iCmW  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these n$2RCQ  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction  :Au /2  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one s{/qS3=  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract x "(9II*  
surgery. FXo2Y]K3`L  
DISCUSSION 9YF$CXonE=  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically Icp0A\L@  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract yoqa@V  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes Y~n` ~(  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 6(sIYZ2yq  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and THhy~wC".  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is H:a|x#"  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, LEh)g[  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract nj\_lL+  
services throughout Australia. j.3o W  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age . 9 LL+d  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is W'_/6_c$!  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous =:h3w#_c  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye z^s ST  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract {TZE/A3D,  
between studies because of different methodologies and Y~oT)wTU  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well '=} Y2?(  
as the different age structures of the study populations. /~}_hO$S  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of a ]1i/3/  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 2/tb6' =  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity j$eCe< .3  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. |#TXE|#ux  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the eX<K5K.B  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. _1JmjIH)M  
80 McCarty et al. k]I*:'178  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort  a@|.;#FF  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total KC Xwn  
(years) (%) (%) (%) R}J-nJlb  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81)  3t  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( !cCg/  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) /!b x`cKG  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 6=>7M b$  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) ^\YQ_/\~L  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) y<r44a_!  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) Q=.g1$LP  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) C MqM;1  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) ~'f8L #[M  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) d]k='  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) $i&\\QNn  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) -q(:%;  
Age-standardized tG 7+7Z =  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) 5 TET<f6R  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract w$% BlqN  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. YnxU (v'\  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 J_/05( 48  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the N K"%DU<  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude QAXYrRu  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 14u^[M" U  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 5xv,!/@  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains tz8t9lb[  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 6+#,=!hF{  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than &O{t^D)F  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, .ftUhg  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in jr dtd6b}  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, /~"AG l.  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens j~$ )c)h"  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. ;l#?SY Y  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 'w `d$c/p  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, Q}ZBr^*]1e  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that (77Dif0)'  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and (aBP|rxg  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is 0Sz/c+ 6  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted tdb4?^.s  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement X &09  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We .1%i`+uZ  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction /^8t'Jjd,  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 0YHYx n  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this !zl/0o  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their rcpvH}N:  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants {bxhH)a'  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the d OzO/w&  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ 8Q +TE;  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 'fX er!L}  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to WoJ]@Me8  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change AZ}%MA; q  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function l'P[5'.  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in x%ZiE5#  
overall quality of life.22 UYl JO{|a  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually &<m WA]cAL  
significant posterior capsule opacification following I(F1S,7  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 7?)m(CFy  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated '[0 3L9  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear F&-5&'6G+  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an zX006{vig  
opaque capsule. !<JG&9ODP  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and Q2??Kp] 1  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, <%T%NjN PQ  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We H 7 o$O  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more GIJV;7~  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is k B$lkl\C  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 Va&KIHw  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any #nt<j2}m  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of e{d_p%(  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care 1mkQ"E4  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without h=mI{w*  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the K'ed5J  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated p2M?pV  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. `3H?*\<(  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem as\)S?0`.  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract M<hs_8_*  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will j8F~j?%!  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the ueS[sN!  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in  $A dp  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well vs)HbQ  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes Z\o AE<$  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. P,LXZ  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract 8*Nt&`@  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for C'xU=OnA8  
cataract extractions increases. h1D~AgZOVj  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5Rt0h$_J  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants [0%Gu 5_\  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the 3IRRFIiO  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell g~WNL^GGS  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and dk, I?c &  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient Y+Q,4s  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal :@z5& h  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. <o"D/<XnB3  
REFERENCES lpX p )r+  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. |] f"j':  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. {/[?YTDU  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, @a7(*<".  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population l%)=s~6z  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. cq+M *1;  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens o^"d2=  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated Ar{=gENn  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ;@ !d!&  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related &#EVE xL  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. wx?{ |  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. ~IN$hKg^  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye e|+;j}^C  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population E'kQ  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: < c4RmnA  
363–71. >kLH6.  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. h ?qYy$  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye t>=y7n&q  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. Q; /!oA_  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. xo"4mbTV  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient Pc-8L]2oaF  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. nO7o7bc  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. "=RoI  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated o>,z %+  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. _"t.1+-K  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. es(LE/`e  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too Vv"wf;#  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal F vk: c-  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: y Q @=\'  
77–80. u9^;~i,  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice u2\qg;dP  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? >^ 1S26  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. x$b[m 20  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest nv[Sb%/  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye >-o:> 5  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic 7T;RX rT  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ZV^J5wYE  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading umrI4.1c  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. ?4?jG3p  
82 McCarty et al. ` A{~}6jw  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & |.8=gS5  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. 67:<X(u+!  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume ' >3RZ& O  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International {:8[Mdf  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. G[-jZ  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and rBPxGBd4  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. C$;s+ALy[  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 0J-ux"kfI  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased RtM.}wv;  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment jCv+m7Z  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. bUB6B  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the HON[{Oq  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health d>-EtWd  
Organization, 1997. rzj'!~>U  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, M_)T=s *  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation LMzYsXG*[  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. e(5R8ud  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. % 7:  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 2`eu3vA  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 41D[[Gh  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. #(4hX6?5AI  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. n_2 LkW<?  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ?`}U|]c  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. @"2-tn@q_  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 1'B?f# s  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract  >S/>2e:  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and C@W0fz  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. svgi!=  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. k/Q]K e  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to *E6 p=  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. Rznr 9L  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. pDfF'jt9  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A =T6\kz9)`  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule )[.URp&   
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. AU2Nmf?]%  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. A":x<9   
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health n$iz   
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 2x CGr>X  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in $dVjxo  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, 9m>_q Wa A  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract 3]A'C&  
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:
免费考博论坛网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交