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 hRN nj  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ;LC?3.  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to p4@0[z'  
unoperated cataract in Australia. [7\x(W-:@>  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual S "/-)_{  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than R:`)*=rL%  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination \b}%A&Ij  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography P}"T 3u\N  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who X4JSI%E  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater k+zskfo  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or A`* l+M^z  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. G8.nKoHv7x  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne +q%b'!&Q  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 BdP+>Ij  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria s`|KT&r  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract ovZ!}  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had !xU[BCbfYV  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 'A9Z ((  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber M[C)b\  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber "-Pz2QJY  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated ;u=%Vn"2a  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or @SI,V8i  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven /I:&P Pff  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate 6m@B.+1  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery g""Ep  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% j@{B 8  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone OlgM7Vrl  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an :sttGXQX  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision yY]E~  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no G=LK irj(  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural Z@bSkO<Y  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance y8Rq2jI;(e  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated Ro;I%j  
cataract. \Yn0|j>  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is  >hzSd@J&  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 1vS-m x  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of n TD4^'  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes T=RabKVYP  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. zFQm3!.  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health u\"/EaQ{  
services accessibility, prevalence #$]8WSl  
INTRODUCTION T^{=c x9x9  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in [KCR@__  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all VGc.yM)& j  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate jeB"j  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be Yh Ow0 x  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 G(ZEP.h`u  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting J#q^CWN3R  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is ,6o tm  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in < +k dL  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists i29a1nD4Hm  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather }8s&~f H  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral AX{7].)F  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has Z3=N= xY]  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for 9}L2$^#,NA  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has d+6q% U  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 j(}pUV B  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is G]{^.5  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the l;&kX6 w  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ,el[A`b  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence )]4=anJu@|  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors FMhuCl 2  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to N2Ysi$  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. &FJr?hY%  
METHODS  y~wr4Q=  
Study population bI_MF/r''  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual Oamz>Hplu  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 6j+X@|2^  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to  %Pj}  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. H SGz-  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of q_mxZM ->  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen U0srwt97S  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites  M%W#0  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. VZ y$0*  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 K5\l (BB  
Original Article zr_L V_e  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 3K/ 'K[~  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD yF%e)6  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia pjFj{  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, Z glU{sU  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au g jzWW0C  
78 McCarty et al. 7~'%ThUb$-  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Sm?|,C3V  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural rc~)%M<[2  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify [z+YX s!N  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a ; C(5lD&\5  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of %L7DC`  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, ,:MUf]Ky  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of >i.$s  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. {4f%UnSz(  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local jsr)  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. NLYf   
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian ;X0uA?  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. <S6?L[_  
Assessment of cataract E?|NYu#I6  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after u|u)8;'9(  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine >r,z^]-  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the AeN:wOm  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using >uQjygjj  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and DAORfFG74  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on ba ,n/yH  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) H!6&'=c{k  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, CtD<% v3`  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, lb=fS%  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than ]iFW>N*a  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to HJpx,NU'  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual FB>P39u  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, 2_?VR~mA#  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. jO*H8 XO  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to FJ?]|S.?,  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the <4/q5*&  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight (R RRG;*n#  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the Zc&pJP+M'U  
analyses. np}0O  X  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., %.\+j,G7  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 1}ifJ~)5S  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. HyYJ"54  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 19oyoi"  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph HoWK# Nz\  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were )2Y]A^Y   
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera < mFU T  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 9~K+h/  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately XJq]l6a:  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated ]Al)>  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies eU]I !pI<  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were j4=\MK  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, rO/Sj<0^  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph cN\_1  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical Hbu :HFJ!  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) Un5 AStG  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to yaHkWkl =  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. -`t9@1P> =  
Assessment of risk factors 3z"%ht~;  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information p}X *HJq$  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 RyWfoLc  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration `sd H q  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, v Et+^3=  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension kmu7~&75  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and D>-Pv-f/  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were GW.Y = S  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to !D/W6Ic@  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 7Q&S [])  
and use of vitamin supplements. Gxt6]+r  
Data management and statistical analysis T @n};,SQ  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a `vf]C'  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, UHIXy#+o5  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or ydE}.0zN  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at  0rAuK7  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms A 0;ng2&  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 5 <7sVd.  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency @CC 6 `D  
checks were performed on the entire data set. @U =~ c9  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was 4-C'2?  
employed for statistical analyses. shVEAT'`  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific d"lk"R  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to xb&,9Lxd|  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five [ -R[rF  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates ~/2OK!M  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific |jcIn[)=  
data were weighted according to the 1996 Lo=n)cV1,  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the iaRCV 6cl  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. l}D /1~d  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared  jQ-2SA O  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated gy"<[N .?c  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted O! _d5r&,  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the CKC5S^Mx  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 9A9T'g)Du  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 4Wa*Pcj  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ?^`fPH=  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The *0<)PJ T  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment  EIPXq  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with f5/s+H!  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Q2* ~9QkU  
limits. wGx H  
RESULTS 1had8K-  
Study population 6-+ wfrN2  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ]<C]&03))  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) K \.tR  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did jWdZ ]0m  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was js% n]$N  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as "akAGa!V+  
a whole. %.HLO.A  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to q4,/RZhzh  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The Ty7)j]b"zl  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to s^Xs*T@~h  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 4vCUVo r  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) ?TI]0)  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. B![:fiR`  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery ;<"V}, C  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases q+cD  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any =&(e*u_  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). ($W%&(:/  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three #rNc+  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence +wQ}ZP&  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes k4E9=y?  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% q- 0q:  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract B]6Lbp"oo  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract p(K ^Zc  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall %s^1de  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was oK$Krrs0&  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). 5?([jAOf  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract dDD5OnWmJ  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified A}&YK,$5ED  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated fNfa.0 s  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 6a_U[-a9;  
as information about risk factor exposure was not E'5KJn;_7  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed nwC*w`4  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence .D\oKhV(  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic F w t  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a Q1rEUbvCE  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use $R+gA{49%  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private  z( }w|  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, 5h0Hk<N  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. kqxq'Aq)d  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the }V`_ (%Q-e  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having |5X59! JL  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract "* N#-=MJF  
surgery were not available. dU2;   
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate 5MKM;6cA&p  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had z!18Jh  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been AXSip  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment Un,'a8>V`  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant ^;.u }W  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression D .LR-Z  
model. The factors that remained significantly related $!y^t$u$@  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever 4cM0f,nc+  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been O8_! !Qd  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors :FtV~^Z  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate \%.oi@A  
model. M0 \gp@Fe  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract Xw< ;)m  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with )b>misb/  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 0GeL">v,:=  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort rqdN%=C  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total !>80p~L  
(years) (%) (%) (%) &GJVFr~z  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) d|7LCW+HW  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) ?wCX:? g  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ~>lqEa  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) CI-za !T  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) ?eX/vqk  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) As,e.V5!  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) |UMm>.\'  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) w5~j|c=_W  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 7Re\*[)T  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) CM++:Y vJ  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) ryh"/lu[B  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) " M?dU^U^  
Age-standardized 4 l-Urn Z  
(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) SlR//h  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 RJerx:]  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% su1fsoL0  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, DwGM+)!  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). RO/(Ldh  
Outcomes of cataract surgery w)@Wug  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ~S;-sxoO0l  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Pvi2j&W84  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ,@?9H ~\  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular Fb%?qaLmCv  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact v^t7)nx^  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 5  > 0\=  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected @_-, Q5  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% C5I7\ 9F)  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes C12V_)~2  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 9cP{u$  
P = 0.027). w->Y92q]  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Y!_c/!Tx  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without :"!Z9l\@  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 2672oFD  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, ?yq= c  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the 0,DrVGa  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 Zf!Q4a "  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this _&V,yp!|  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four g%S/)R,,ct  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these nTr]NBR  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction IA.7If&k  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one q 9xA.*  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract V^[&4  
surgery. ]9/A=p?J@  
DISCUSSION [y'blCb  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically qX-5/;n  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract L$OZ]  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes aQx6;PC  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual k $^/$N  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and hjg1By(  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is Fh)xm* u(  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, # 2^H{7  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract G2I%^.s  
services throughout Australia. |Vz)!M  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age 7:vl -ZW  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 61kSCu  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous t.;._'  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 2H9hN4N  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract iU 6,B  
between studies because of different methodologies and vf.MSk?~ar  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well A8mc+ Bf(  
as the different age structures of the study populations. Iga +8k  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of q9ra  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. jnJ*e-AW  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity v4|TQ8!wR  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. Ir>4-@  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the Xv!Gg6v6  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. u=qK_$d4  
80 McCarty et al. 7M~/ q.  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort *Xk5H,:  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total |T"vF`Kr(>  
(years) (%) (%) (%) &\6},JN  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) V^Z5i]zT  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 4bL *7bA  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) Rf`_q7fm  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) $dI mA  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) [5IbR9_  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) J'ce?_\?PY  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) }Em{?Hqy  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) &':C"_|&r  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) iupkb  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) )N- '~<N  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ^ICSh8C  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) `!N}u  
Age-standardized R3og]=uFzm  
(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) 7NT} Zwf  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract (Ox&B+\v+v  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 7)<Ib j<M  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 K:< Viz  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 0|-}>>qb\  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude !4+Die X  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the tik*[1it  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 5 5.2UN  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ]8}2  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban +Eb-|dM  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than T'7>4MT(  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, U}X'RCM  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in S[9b I&C  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, w{T$3F`@9  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens T7mT:z>:  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. [ >GblL  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable :9 (kU  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, JE:LA+ (  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that xzY/$?  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Ygg+=@].@  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is " w V  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted Y{e,I-"{  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement |b='DJz2  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We K'8?%&IQ  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 7ZAxhFC  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have /o$6"~t  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this R=Lkf  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their V+>RF  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants [8tpU&J  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the `r=^{Y  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ A6_ER&9$>N  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their gJwX  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to ueW/i  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 0#yH<h$   
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function :G9d,B7*  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in !F6rcDKI  
overall quality of life.22 po]<sB  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually 9P <1/W!  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 0.!vp?  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% +('xzW  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated Y~( 8<`^  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear c2GTN"  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an SJ8 ~:"\P  
opaque capsule. z:O:g?A  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and [ot+EA  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, bS|h~B]rd  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We .Q</0*sp  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more ?g K|R  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ~:C`e4  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 Y?oeP^V'u  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any )h(=X&(d  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of qMO(j%N5  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ^'sy hI\  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without Xe ^NVF  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the Kx;la  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated z^KBV ^n  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. !a%_A^t7  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ~WmA55  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ^m.%FIwR  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ncR]@8  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the /5>A 2y  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 1B{u4w7S4e  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well y]k{u\2A  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes "GxQ9=Z  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. )h%tEY$AJ  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract 2tp95E `(O  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for _^0UK|[  
cataract extractions increases. P>] *pD  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS k#5Qwxu`  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 9$R}GK  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the EBUCG"e  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell Q"GZh.m  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and cEPqcy *  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient j;&su=p"  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal > a8'MK  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. [_tBv" z  
REFERENCES 7}fT7tsN  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 5mI}IS|@  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. >s ;dooZ  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, @_"Z]Y ,D0  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population vSJ# }&  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. IKeO&]k  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens %Wg8dy|  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated lMb&F[KJ7  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 7MwS[N%#  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related `mDCX  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. k4~2hD<|  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. Nb/Z +  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye ^[hx`Rh`t  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population p']oy;t  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: QWAtF@qTV  
363–71. /9@ VnM  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. h5 PZ?Zd  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ee .,D  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. oYrg;]H  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. )s>R~7  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient '>#8 F.  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ~y8KQ-1n"  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. \~I>@SG2W+  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated d&t,^Hj  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. +Z=DvKsT J  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. .% +y_.l  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too o%[swoM@  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal irKM?#h  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: BKd?%V8:Q  
77–80. 6l& ,!fd  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice F4 =V* /7  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? 0K^? QM|S  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 5O"$'iL  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest &/-}`hIAT  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye C,VvbB  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic #]@|mf q  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. J3_Ou2cF`  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 1SSS0&  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. p|Nh:4iN  
82 McCarty et al.  a S ,  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & V$3`y=8  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. F $1f8U8  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume d VyT`  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International PUErvL t  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. @IV,sz e  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 59BB-R,V  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. puox^  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison N."x@mV  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased zV8{|-2]No  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment B0D  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. y'(a:.%I  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the rG3?Z^&R+  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health aATNeAR  
Organization, 1997. u9N /9  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, @;}vK=6L  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation st)qw]Dn;Y  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. WaSZw0U}y  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. J;'H],w}f  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of \&[(PNl  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative KkCsQ~po  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. DhXV =Qw  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. m"!Q5[  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated oSIP{lfp2Q  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. d'iSvd.  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. T"1=/r$Ft  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 2S-f5&o  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 8.Ufw. 5  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. 2D /bMq  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. hbEqb{#}@  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to \>x1#Vr>#V  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. oU se~  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. HuR774f[  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A b[<L l%K  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule Mfnfp{.)  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. sR/y|  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. o`G6!  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health >~_z#2PA  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. e?FQ6?  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in ;hF}"s hJN  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark,  [w!T  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract HJBGxy w  
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