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 RT4ns+J1  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes RL SP?o2J  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to +t})tDPXw  
unoperated cataract in Australia. k7W7S`H  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual xm6cn\e  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than &AG,]#  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination #B_ ``XV  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography t[Xx LG*  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ehPrxIyC  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater MyXgp>?~T  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or @or&GcQ*  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. bO^#RVH  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne pc J5UJY  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 rfp eX   
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria  LkD$\i  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract K1AI:$H  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had al.~[T-O+  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 Ph'*s{   
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber |$`)d87,  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber mp:%k\cF|  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Z_.Eale^  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or V\^3I7F  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven L1 1/XpR  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate p,.+i[V  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery ;I1} g]  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% `j{q$Y=AG  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone 2| $  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an i/N4uq}'A<  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision wg\*FfQn  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no 9 tvLj5~  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural TR/'L!EE  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance 484lB}H  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated !*_5 B'  
cataract. Bt[OGa(q  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is d~1Nct$:  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced {_t i*#  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of 0vbiq  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes /R7qR#  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Xo]QV.n  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health 5|&8MGW-$  
services accessibility, prevalence H7bdL 8/  
INTRODUCTION H-$)@  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in  Cg[]y1Ne  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all `oQ)qa_  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate q{I,i(%m8  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be jkw:h0hX  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 <Hw)},_*  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting 'wB6-  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is k9H7(nS{  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 0?59o!@h  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists /Ud<4j-  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather a-w=Lp VM  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral &iCE/  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has o;bK 7D  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for DrE +{Spm  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has *c'nPa$+|S  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 S0?4}7`A  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is \7M+0Ul1  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the *{/ ww9fT  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract y+D 3(Bsn  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence V?"X0>]0  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors ,'[&" Eg  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to >'IFr9&3  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ds@X%L;_  
METHODS zs#s"e:jeR  
Study population 90JD`Nz  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual Fe8JsB-  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 a(}dF?M=  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to %JmRJpCvR  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ShXk\"  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of u{Jv6K,  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen &' ,A2iG  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites !]c]:ed\C  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. 0Y rdu,c  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 .yz-o\,gF%  
Original Article Ki#({~  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 4R_Vi[ i  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD [$; \1P/  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Q y(Gy'q~  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, >7@kwj-f)  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au  ?39B(T  
78 McCarty et al. 7U=|>)Q0s  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Y|ONCc  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural BR8W8nRb  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify x!\FB.h4!(  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a J?/.|Y]e  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of vCC}IDd  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, c&zZsJ"~  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of "=~P&Mi_  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Vp3 9`m-W  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local e_C9VNP  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. F  8*e  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian bkmW[w:M  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. - w41Bvz0  
Assessment of cataract Y-(),k_Q:  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after sA18f2  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine Zf~ [4Eeb  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ]:* 8 Mb#  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using AF{k^^|H  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 1](5wK-Z  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on bS 'a)  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) u7|{~D&f  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, y^; =+Z  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, j7;v'eA`;7  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than f.Y9gkt3d  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to  & y1' J  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual oOk.Fq  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, \Cx) ~bq<  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. W(*:8}m,p  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to 7e&R6j  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the o{*8l#x8  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight T:0X-U  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the m{={a5GD  
analyses. 1E Lzzn  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., 6y)xMX  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in S~vb ISl  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. lo:]r.lX{  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman qs6yEuh#  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph z602(mxGg  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were c L*D_)?8  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 6w K=  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 GCrh4rxgg  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately 9bjjo;A  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 3+m#v8h1  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies rWbu oG+8  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Oa~t&s  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, %" $.2O@  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph w5jH#ja  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical zdn e2  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) xc R  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to zsI0Q47\  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 9A\J*OU  
Assessment of risk factors lfu1 PCe5  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information /-4i"|  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ;^:~xJFx|  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration +IVVsVp  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, N##T1 Qm)  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension ksY^w+>(!  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and qsFA~{o.  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were XPzwT2_E  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to HeGGAjc  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants >;o^qi_$  
and use of vitamin supplements. [ x!T<jJ  
Data management and statistical analysis .EH^1.|v  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a X =S;8=N  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, {exF" ap  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or 9R>A,x(  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at i1vBg}WHN  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms QfU 0*W?r  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 8c+i+gp!  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency @Qruc\_  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ezwcOYMXK  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was FlVGi3  
employed for statistical analyses. S_ c#{4n  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ,Q(n(m'  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to (' `) m  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five kp<9o!?)  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates HtY\!_Ea  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific )^%,\l-!  
data were weighted according to the 1996 }M'\s  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the k>VP<Zm13  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. CN brXN  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared P; hjr;  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated _sZ/tU@_-K  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted H W.S~eLw*  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 56?U4wj7{  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 8Mws?]\/q  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically aeSy, :  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ]3 0 7 .  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The J_rCo4}  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment * +A!12s@  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ?H*_:?=6  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 8qS)j1.!  
limits. ( Y/ DMQ  
RESULTS >Cd%tIie*  
Study population u#J5M&#  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403  PJk Mn  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 6mRvuJ%  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did ;HqK^[1\  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was .V/TVz!b  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as K3 ]hUe #  
a whole. I &{dan2  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 5^* d4[&+  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The C8&)-v|  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to |":^3  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 7;|6g8=  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) cE]tvL:g  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. {_(;&\5  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery $: Qi9N   
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases .P,\69g~A  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any xZ,g6s2o  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). lfj>]om$  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three ]4z?sk@  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence 5[/ *UtB  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes <7TpC@"/g  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% <'GI<Hc  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract CH9#<?l  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract |n6nRE wW  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall ND21;  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was vkBngsS  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). YJ!6)d?C.  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract cm7aL%D$c  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified ^$x^JM ]/  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated IS'=%qhC`  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 8Cm^#S,+  
as information about risk factor exposure was not % ;6e@U}  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 9IIe:  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence TR: D  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic },[j+wx  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a @~a52'\  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use J@yy2AZnO  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private =|?w<qc  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ADHe! [6q  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ^(&:=r.PC  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the g<{~f  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having pK$^@~DE  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract OwDjUKeN  
surgery were not available. $9ON 3>  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate nTYqZlI,  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had R8HA X  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been +F67g00T|  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment P^1rNB  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant `CHgTkv  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression G m.v-T$  
model. The factors that remained significantly related N 4,w  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever f Z\Ev%F  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been R$w=+%F  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors rtUd L,Hx  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate EzthRe9  
model. tpCEWdn5  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract sY1*Wo lA  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with uswz@ [pa  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 wePMBL1P*  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort b!UT<:o  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Dcp,9"yt%  
(years) (%) (%) (%) n287@Y4Ru  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) ~[,E i k  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) -8TJ~t%w4  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) '9RHwKu&s  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 5a_K|(~3I  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) NP|U |zn  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) c{&sf y  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) h3JIiwv0!  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) [ 9$>N  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) i>0bI^H  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) cIq3En  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) Ak4iG2  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) _<5> E  
Age-standardized 2#|Q =rWB  
(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) )~!Gs/w6  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 qt3 \*U7x  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% WRD^S:`BH  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, Ba@UX(t  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). " $m3xO  
Outcomes of cataract surgery F1 MPo;e  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior iUSs)[]H>  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were hX[hR  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 3B;B#0g50  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular `bivAL  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact c)lM i}/  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of Tw|=;m  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected CQ13fu +|6  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% {OB\~$TH  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes t0hg!_$bq  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, M|76,2u   
P = 0.027). @'~v~3 $S  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 6i>xCb  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without n?:s /6tP  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract .PxtcC.K  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, |?{Zx&yUw  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the 1oodw!h W  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 s{hJ"lv:  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this U%U%a,rA5s  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four Z\`uI+`  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these %'@&j2j>  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 3X%>xUI  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one aq[kKS`  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract \>M3E  
surgery. 6fQQKM@a|  
DISCUSSION W aks*^|  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 9?@M Zh  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract zjB8~ku#  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes :\gdQG  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual dsrzXmE0  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and </Q<*@p?  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is zTm&m#){3A  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, s$| GVv1B  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract AfFF u\  
services throughout Australia. YG!~v~sV  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age S'vrO}yU  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ^Jsx^?  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous y kwS-e  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye G-9]z[\#  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract Pr<.ld\  
between studies because of different methodologies and -7$7TD`'7  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well ~Wf&$p<|  
as the different age structures of the study populations. " :@5|4qK  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 7S(5\9  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. H?m9HBDpn  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity Akb#1Ww4  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. f]jAa?d T&  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the Oc}4`?oy<O  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. j;WZ[g#t  
80 McCarty et al. LK-2e$1  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort -iLp3m<ai  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total fb0i6RC~&  
(years) (%) (%) (%) S|CN)8Jsi  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) AvfSR p  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( eG55[V<!  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) R7+3$F5B  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) r#M0X^4A  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 8E`A`z  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) IH(]RHTp%  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) V+G. TI P  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ,UNCBnv1  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) E4idEQ}H  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) [Q9#44@{S;  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) _Vul9=  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) 9ozN$:  
Age-standardized )(V|d$n  
(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) b9`vYnLk  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract Q"rQVO  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. `>'%!E9G  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 4}-{sS}MP  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the jiw5>RNt  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude Z'=:Bo{  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the b`: n i   
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). e x" E50  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains IP<]a5  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban R2K{vs  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 5A Fy6Ab  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, re}_+sv U  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in 8);G'7O  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, 'Z ;8-1M?O  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens %# M=qP  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. %BBM %Lj  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable VDy2 !0  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, TjDDvXY  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that }(MI}o}  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 5ub|r0&M  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is % )o'9  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted YL[n85l>1  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement D_s0)|j$cy  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We kfc5ra>&  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction ,ICn]P dz@  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have *h([ai"1-  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this |J:|56kVZq  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their rm}%C(C{J  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants !{S& "  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the b aO ^Z  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ .Tm m  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their Nv[MU@Tv  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to NP#6'eH\  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change #OMFv.  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function -|.Izgc  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Ga$J7 R  
overall quality of life.22 ojva~mnFf  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually ko-,l6E  
significant posterior capsule opacification following  B=d :r  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% qdCcMcGt  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated QKB*N)%6  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear KkJrh@lk  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an '$q=r x  
opaque capsule. ~[@gu,Wb  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and ]I ^b&N  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 4roqD;5|~|  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We qP k`e}D  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more ) Vf!U "  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Y n7z#bu  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 V1-URC24vd  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any +Y! P VMF  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of UTS.o#d  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care E#zLm  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without FGey%:p9$  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the GoUsB|-\  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated t9eEcq Mg  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ;O~k{5.iS  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 2 r';)8:  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract UP .4#1I  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will IY"+hHt  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the `UD,ne  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in /g)(  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well ,CxIA^  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes IgyoBfj\d  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. PJF1+I.%c#  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract q@&6&cd  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 91\Sb:>  
cataract extractions increases. Whl^~$+f  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SVn $!t  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants ,<s /K  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the :|a$[g5  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell S;^'Ek"Z.  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and mFrDV,V  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient D k<NlH zp  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal  rrP_7D  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. ZJ8"5RW  
REFERENCES nrV!<nNBk  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. Oq*;GR(Q  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. ?0tm{qP  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, 7{lWg x  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population :/R>0n,  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. VA5f+c/ %  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens j6WDh}#  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 4I8QM&7  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 0TaN#  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related g(C/J9J  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. T3NH8nH9"z  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. V an=dz G  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye b}&.IJ&40j  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population m wutv8?  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 2f6BZ8H+Z  
363–71. NJCSo(O  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. hkOFPt&  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye g:s|D hE[  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. O^n\lik  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. \dbaY:(  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 5+2qx)FZ  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. m.FN ttkM  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. ftz-l&5  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated 2 sj: &][R  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. L}7 TM:%  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. }`aT=_B  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too B OD!0CR5  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ?Y 5Vje[^  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: KGGnypx`  
77–80. yg6o#;  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice shEAr*u  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? $pIo`F _W  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. p,tkVedR  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest 9 e|[9  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye k7& cc|y  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic N_G84wxx  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. jZH4]^De  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading s@E) =;!  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. p(cnSvg  
82 McCarty et al. gD;T" ^S+  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & e jR_3K^  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. mi1^hl'2  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume RY3=UeoF  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International "$P/ek  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. A%X=yqY  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and )3O#T$h  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. B)/c]"@89  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison ^y%8_r&  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased s IBP$9  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment q#1G4l.  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. l5]R*mR  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the H/k]u)Gtv  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health C,%Dp0  
Organization, 1997. NJmx(!Xsh  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, {NcJL< ;tS  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation O9m sPb:  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 0!RP7Sx  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. 5!pNo*QK  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of ! &cfX/y8  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative [P0c,97_ H  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. l>L?T#v!_  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. }_-tJ.  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated W7(5z  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. LpI4R  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. c}|} o^  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract LE~vSm^#  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and !I\eIV>0b  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. tOte [~,  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. UtC<TBr  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to r _FI5f  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. MmU`i ,z  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. d>T8V(Bb  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A eu8a<  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule f:y:: z  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. "=KFag  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. +uj;00 D  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health v-^<,|vm2f  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ?R4u>AHS@  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 2^75|Q  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, 1HqN`])l/j  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract ~|"uuA1/#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