ABSTRACT
P@lDhzd Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
>
ka*-8
? of cataract surgery and the factors related to
,41Z_h unoperated cataract in Australia.
{S[+hUl Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual
OI/m_xx@j Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than
3h N?l
:/b 5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination
=ie8{j2: sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography
/6S% h-#\ were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who
k%2woHSu& had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater
Q5%$P\ than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or
*XN|ZGl/ posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2.
9NzK1V0X Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne
$r> $
u residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473
DpA"5RV rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria
cl2+,!: was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract
f[r?J/;P9 surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had
+ftOJFkI had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49
0'
m$hU} (20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber
F"I{_yleq' intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber
'2LK(uaU intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated
Q5K<ECoPk eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or
y&A
0}>a:d better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven
C6<*'5T (11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate
SK][UxoHm vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery
Aho zrroV caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%
6I8A[ of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone
:6h$1
+6 intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an
$~^Y4 }
m opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision
N*mm[F2+F impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no
85{2TXQ^%= particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural
`qXCY^BH2 residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance
GF^)](xY+ status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated
9sQ#v-+Yx cataract.
Gl!fT1zh0 Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is
\N|ma P quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced
{.r
jp`39 in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of
?=^~(
x?S cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes
M94zlW< achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
jsp)e= Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
XT"- services accessibility, prevalence
u*h+c8|zI INTRODUCTION
0m& Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
<w1#
3Mu' Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
s.uw,x ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
L/+KY_b:* of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be
q8=hUD%5C expected from the growth in the elderly population.1
s/+k[9l2 Although there have been a number of studies reporting
E0lro+'lS the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is
XX9u%BZ~ little information about determinants of cataract surgery in
VV%Q "0\ the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists
GEd JB= showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather
x$gVEh*k than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral
I_aSC 4 for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has
5 0KB:1(g shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for
A}h`%b cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has
}i\U,mH0_& been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10
iC`mj To appropriately plan health care services, information is
7j//x Tr}a needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the
Xlp $xp" community as well as the factors associated with cataract
%=G*{mK surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence
I5$]{:L|9 of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors
I `I+7~t related to unoperated cataract in the community and to
?*K{1Ghf describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery.
H6Dw5vG
"l METHODS
&}+^*X Study population
{wS)M Details about the study methodology for the Visual
7w
A.:$ Impairment Project have been published previously.11
fEgwQ-] Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to
h!4jl0oX] recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate.
WKDa]({k% Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of
#ts;s\! census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen
%@Ow.7zh nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites
R4x!b`:i were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.
1{0 L~ Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82
5p]Cwj<u Original Article
tOEY| Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
9% wVE] Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD
J6s@}@R1 Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
=IC
cN| n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne,
J.;{`U=: Victoria 3002, Australia. Email:
cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au k __MYb 78 McCarty et al.
"IE*MmsEz Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
P
r_$%x9D Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
G-#]|) residents. A household census was conducted to identify
*41
2)zEy eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
%X^K5Io resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
gK
Uci the household census, basic information about age, sex,
_O w]kP=' country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
6vL+qOd x corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.
]\ DIJ>JZ Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local
K H&o`U(} examination site for a more detailed interview and examination.
y'#i'0eeL The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian
nbf w7u Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.
48p< ~#<W\ Assessment of cataract
2n3g!M6~ A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after
)o\U4t pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine
'v?"TZ hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the
[:Y`^iR. time of the examination and subsequently from photos using
x+;"(]# the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and
*v6 j7<H posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on
vf-cx\y7 retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16)
PZB_6!}2[F of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis,
CgxGvM4 cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity,
g*a|QBj% PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
SGK=WLGM8 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
R.rxpJ+kU or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
tIJ?caX5= acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
?V>{3 nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
\
W.uV[\ Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
~P5;k_& intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
5uxB)Dx) analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
Sru}0M#
M cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
B!iz=+RNC1 analyses.
Y-
vLEIX= A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
n k@e# Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
6Q}WX[| tQ height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
6OLp x)fG Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
EKTn$k= Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
yL.Z{wd the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
c(5r photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
i{.%4tA4 (Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
6'YsSde". film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
+PfXc?VU by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
L28DBj E)A by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
<f+9wuZ between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were
Q
q7+_,w resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing,
wr+r J the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph
W!.vP~ > grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical
z&x3":@u< cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
b!hs|emo; for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
i=mk#.j~ the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
I C?bqC+ Assessment of risk factors
(|kcSnF0 A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
~EJ+<[/ about education, employment and ethnic background.11
h|Z%b_a Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
P9/Bc^5' and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
$22_>OsA including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
"jFRGgd79 and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
nz%{hMNYH duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
l]wjH5mz=i collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
QhqXd determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
dd{pF\a and use of vitamin supplements.
%hnv
go:^g Data management and statistical analysis
fVJsVZ"6v` Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
w4UaWT1J questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
J/ !Mt Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
dd=';%? on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
J#OiY
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
e_iXR#bZc were entered into a computer with double data entry and
[->uDbt zL reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
3\~
RWoB0u checks were performed on the entire data set.
BEfp3|Stb SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
kl&9M!;:n employed for statistical analyses.
f:)%+)U<Xm Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
s2'] "wM rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
} eL*gy account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
n@"h^- per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
C OC6H'F were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
N9s ,.. data were weighted according to the 1996
XNm%O Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the
,cg%t9 cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.
afJ`1l Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared
7G^`'oZ tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated
E@%X cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted
.JG> /+ into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the
{8YNmxF# Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract.
S9'8rn!_ final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically
%%=PpKYtSD significant. Design effect was assessed through the use
$u`v
k|\R of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The
uBPxMwohR design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment
j!oD9&W4~ made in the variance by adding the variance associated with
[kjm EMF9i the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence
:gvw5h% limits.
n
qR8uL> RESULTS
/M.@dW7
w Study population
K:i{us` A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403
H+VKWGmfG (90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)
IQz:DJ rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did
qq)Dh'5*e, not differ from participants.16 The study population was
^JKV~+ Q representative of the Victorian population and Australia as
xK3
xiR a whole.
h.`U)6*?&N The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
[J6*Q9B<V& 98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The
RH+'"f Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to
ns{BU->f 101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural
wGXnS"L! residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)
##6_kcL:6G and 701 (47.5%) were men.
vw'`t6
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery
n$ri:~s As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases
*i}Nb*Z3 dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any
{APsi7HYBr cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).
jf_0IE Although the rates varied somewhat between the three
KvFGwq"X strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence
m}x&]">9 limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
`@Q%}J with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
UHtxzp =[ (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
q*<Fy4j (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
^Ms)T3dM surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
2^Tj@P7 weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
Zl0Kv*S 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
z)Y<@2V*C Risk factors for unoperated cataract
$uA?c&
e Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
%'}L.OvG as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
b9ON[qOMN cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
@$5GxIw<l as information about risk factor exposure was not
`Z3Qx~fx available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
FBjIft5e in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
Su<Ggv" (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
.b4_O
CGg integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
z2m%L0 measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
_)J;PbK~ of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
%!r>]M < health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
$B6"fYiDk glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
uC3o@qGW< In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the
_Ee`Uk level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having
` Nn^ cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract
/t-m/&> surgery were not available.
H61,pr> The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate
or_x0Q analyses were related to: whether a participant had
U!:Q|':=h ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been
ti:qOSIDTA diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment
8K!
l X status (currently employed) and age. These significant
/r
#.BXP factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
6#xP[hlR[ model. The factors that remained significantly related
s(Of
EzsH= to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
XqVhC
): seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
]8(_{@/ diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
UV%Al)3 were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
=T)4Oziks model.
m~ %\f8w-x The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
g{@q who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
/I{<]m$ Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
a3i4e
GT - Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
|3f?1:"Z Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
etdI:N*x (years) (%) (%) (%)
O/^7TBTn<r 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
.OM m"RtK Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
"nXL7N0 50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
$LLkYOwI Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
>HatbbA 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
@b\/\\{ Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
K!6k< 70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)
m72r6Yq2@ Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)
C- /<5D
j 80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3)
bCY8CIF Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8)
i-)OY, 90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)
$pK2H0c Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0)
4S>A}rWz Age-standardized
A+*M<
W (95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0)
;
F% 3b47 aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2
Heatt?(RR their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27%
~G.'pyW (26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared,
bcFG$},k 1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).
Y.&nxT95= Outcomes of cataract surgery
To1 .U)do Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior
coq7La[ cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were
[F4]p
R( left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular
CAdq oCz| lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular
)
-x0xY
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact
Jhdo#}Ub posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of
$d2mcwh\ eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected
BH"f\oc visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43%
v7x%V%K of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes
`R@1Sc<*| (11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,
^$-ID6 P = 0.027).
!5lb+%7 The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity
IzPnbnS} of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without
/<7'[x< cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract
wp7<0PP and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared,
-?L~\WJAL 2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the
,@1rP 55 operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18
J:g4ES-/ (moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this
}pqnF53 moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four
_p0@1 s(U (15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these
bzYj`t? four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction
MYyV{W*T> and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one
GH ]c had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract
8NCu;s surgery.
E6+c{4 1B DISCUSSION
L\;n[,. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically
B?A]0S assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract
b ]A9$- surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes
ux>wa+XFa of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual
R^u 1(SF Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and
_,r2g8qm high response rate have ensured that the study population is
a6Zg~>vX representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore,
|.]sL0;4Z these data can be used to plan age-related cataract
k5M3g* services throughout Australia.
(rTn6[* We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age
$)or{Z$& of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is
{N.JA= significantly less than was reported in a number of previous
ylTX studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye
Lp1\vfU<+ Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract
u9c^:Op between studies because of different methodologies and
<PMQ$s>KK cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well
rJz`v/:|P as the different age structures of the study populations.
{
pJf~ Other studies have used less conservative definitions of
bX*>Zm cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined.
d@b" ~r} In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity
Sm5T/&z has not been included in the definition of cataract.
.#Vup{. Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the
Sv#S_jh actual need for cataract surgery in the community.
lEXER^6 80 McCarty et al.
Q0j4c Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort
^}Wk Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
j3t,Cx (years) (%) (%) (%)
YP4lizs. 40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81)
*4HogC Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (
G4<M@ET
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17)
JmBe1"hs Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00)
4Pv Pp{Y 60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19)
/:GeXDJw Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26)
L]e@./C$ 70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1)
\c(Z?`p]R1 Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46)
JIOeDuw+ 80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4)
A7enC,Ey Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3)
=6O<1<[y 90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5)
38zG[c|X Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8)
1e)5D& njS Age-standardized
E``\Jre@ (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)
\$Q? Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract
HceZT e@ surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected.
:pw6#yi8` Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81
ozUsp[W > The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the
\N a Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude
f+V^q4 rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the
S4C4_*~Vd crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%).
\J-}Dp\0b However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains
Sau?Y Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban
q Oyo+hu Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than
Xf6\{ the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%,
8;<3Tyjzu 95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in
Xf%wW[~ Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due,
,/Al' perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens
(X/dP ~ implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio.
tdOox87YK The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable
&pFP=|Pq Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization,
*T-v^ndJh states that cataract surgical services should be provided that
i:n1Di1~E ‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and
|'!9mvt= improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is
{1L{ not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted
\:Z8"~G in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement
kn= fW1 in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We
HSlAm&Y\ found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction
I!u fw\[ had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have
,jJbQIu# shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this
0I7 r{T cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their
Tu7}*vsR
current vision than participants without cataract or participants
k
*|WI$ with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the
!CUX13/0
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’
R=<uf:ca ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their
wvPS0] vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to
6I-Qq?L[H their change in visual functioning score than to their change
d6zfP1lQ in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function
!BEl6h has been shown to be associated with improvement in
aB2t /ua overall quality of life.22
~pPj A recent review found that the incidence of visually
}]+k significant posterior capsule opacification following
M&5De{LS} cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36%
qU+qY2S: capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated
[KNA5(Y0 with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear
*B%ulsm capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an
j7
\y1$w opaque capsule.
EzGO/uZ] A number of studies have shown that the demand and
?;ovh nY) timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity,
!H4C5wDu degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We
Qkx}A7sK have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more
k@9CDwh*s likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is
%^}|HG*i?? employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7
xAu&O\V In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any
/m8&E*+T1 particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of
o>@9[F,h+ having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care
RZTC+ylj in Australia may explain the fact that people without
I@l }%L Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the
(laVmU?I7 USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated
D:fLQ
8a with unoperated cataract in Australia.
)|IMhB+4 In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem
v|GDPq in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract
y9X1X{ surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will
JXk<t5@D increase further with the ageing of the population: the
nPj
&a number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in
6w*q~{"(
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well
"cx#6Bo| accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes
r"x/,!_E of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good.
zi= gOm These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract
F.@U
X{J surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for
nW!pOTJq21 cataract extractions increases.
oh.8WlI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
9s`j@B0N57 The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants
d>}R3T from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the
;*q National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell
TY*uK Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and
d <Rv~F@
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient
YZQF*fj of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal
u>h|A(< Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital.
} DQ KfS REFERENCES
]2@g 5H}M 1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94.
$
\vTiS' Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17.
UQ.DKUg 2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical,
f1TYQ?e and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population
VZEDBZ x* sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18.
{5J: ]{p 3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens
)&wJ