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 9}Ud'#E  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes m_\w)  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to S# Tc{@e  
unoperated cataract in Australia. oMawIND a  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual D]S@U>]M!  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than R5c Ya  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 4HQP,  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography tfW/Mf  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Y u\<  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 6ziiV _p  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or j}7as&  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. y! he<4  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne ZqT?7|i  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 SIv8EMGo  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria bCr) 3,  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 86NAa6BW  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had NWWag}  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49  =+9.X8SP  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 1ThONrxu  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Kk#g(YgNz  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated bfy `UZr  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or yQ5&S]Xk$$  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven F4'g}y OLd  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate =!u9]3)  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery y^7;I-  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% q$FwO"dC  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone VP[ -BK[  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an r2A%.bL#  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision ^*.S7.;2o  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ;/+VHZP;  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural pwo5Ij,~q  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance td!WgL,m  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated 6(Za}H  
cataract. qj *IKS  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is w{uq y]  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 6v~` jS%3  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of Tdtn-  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ]-h$CJSY  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ~Wy&xs ZH  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health Pw:(X0@  
services accessibility, prevalence lr SdFJ%  
INTRODUCTION n';"c;Ye)  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in *:t]|$;E\  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all _22;hnG<iy  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate 9F+i+(\,b  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be  E~oQ%X~  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 |jB]5ciT  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting p&1IK8i"  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 2 mM0\ja  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in =Gsn4>~%n  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists j" wX7  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather XVXiiQ^  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral gQy {OU  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 4k' 2FkDA  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for qc^ u%  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has oXw}K((|  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 V0hC[Ilr  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is @91Q=S  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the 0gY,[aQ2  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract 'Y23U7 n0B  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence d;(&_;  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors S0.   
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to $<^4G  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. I!bzvPJ]xc  
METHODS ;u;YfOr  
Study population KobNi#O+  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual e6 s-;  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 a&YD4DQ05  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to =x "N0p  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 0Eq.l<  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of T xRa&1  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen k#k!AcC  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites @]lKQZ^2&  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. k1y&' 3%  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 b6!?K!imT  
Original Article )W9 $_<Z  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia {UT>> *C  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD RW 23lRA6  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia `+]9+:tS  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, NC::;e  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ?}^e,.M0?s  
78 McCarty et al. jM1|+o*Wr  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural @ =x=dL(  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural *%5#\ I  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify mJb>)bO l  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a '/ 3..3k  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of l'-dB  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, c>d+q9M  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of R7cY$ K{j  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Z QND^a:  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local B&|F9Z6D  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. VR5$[-E3  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 5{qFKo"g@,  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. msg&~" Z  
Assessment of cataract a #?% I#  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after  ~d_Z?Z  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine pgT{#[=>  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the tDFN *#(  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using csT_!sI I  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and ftsr-3!Vm  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on x, a[ p\1  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) [~?LOH  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, VztalwI  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 2?rg&og6  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than vjaIFyj  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to VcIsAK".4[  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual N8 }R<3/  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, LslQZ]3MY  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. fGb(=l  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to A,e/y  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the 1F-o3\  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight xeo;4c#S5  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the z|F>+6l"Y7  
analyses. rAIX(2@cR_  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., UtG@0(6C  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in j[m\;3Sp  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. _)p@;vGV  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman !Zgb|e8<  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph !0c7nzjm  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were RW48>4f/+  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera |OF<=GGO+  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 T,Cq;|g5E  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately -aLBj?N c[  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated u9"b,].b  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies j\q1b:pE  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were f'\I52;FB  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, Kl{2^ q>  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph ?0hk~8c  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical 7on$}=%  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)  /8Bh  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to 99G/(Z}  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. E0\ '  
Assessment of risk factors `5<  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information G~a;q+7v'$  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 6=Kl[U0Y  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration s#&jE GBug  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, g?A4C`l6iy  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension  {3yzC  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and LT!.M m  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were 8xDS eXh;  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to TGdD7n&Ehh  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants /8q7pwV  
and use of vitamin supplements. Ag }hyIl  
Data management and statistical analysis bnUpH3  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a 37?%xQ!  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, L:%ek3SOz  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or jeN_ sm81b  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at SLSJn))@!  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms ZL#4X*zT  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and yf*MG&}  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency } !pC}m  
checks were performed on the entire data set. \|@]XNSN  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was *oY59Yf  
employed for statistical analyses. }=^YLu=  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific A~\:}P N  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to *1ek w#'  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five $bF.6  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates /jC0[%~jV  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 2!~ j(_TA  
data were weighted according to the 1996 -869$  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the AVOqW0Z+y  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. "6Nma)8  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared }pu2/44=W  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated Fq&@dxN3  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted NlU:e}zGR  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the r}WV"/]p  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. %~4R)bsJ'  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 2xni! *T+  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use }{ pNasAU  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The A_{QY&%m  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment \'GX^0yK  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with \kzxt/Ow  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Pgr>qcbql  
limits. Zu$f-_"  
RESULTS bNFX+GA/  
Study population c<A@Op"A  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 4eU};Pv  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 6}L[7~1  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did _t:rWC"X  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was [ LL"86D  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as o8KlY?hX  
a whole. L G,XhN  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to M7e O5  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The ;g^QH r  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to GaSk &'n$Y  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural A}~hc&J  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) R|$=Pfg~4  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. "0`r]5 5d  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery "o<:[c9/  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 6DaH+  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any @ D9c  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). 7xwS  .|  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three xPQO}wKa  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence WB6g i2  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes {8@?9Z9R{  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% .oaW#f}0P  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract A. U<  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract '3[Ecy#  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall &^ =t%A%#  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was xfkG& &  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). @o9EX }  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract O5Yk=-_m  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified wh|[ "U('  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated "Z &qOQg%3  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents zi-zg Lx  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 8Dhq_R'r  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed XXuU@G6Z7$  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence nLto=tNUO  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic o[+1O  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a *3S,XMS{O  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use pSE"] N  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private HY5g>wv@  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, .}SW`R Pk  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. 9S=9m[#y'  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the zoC/Hm  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having fU>"d>6!S  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract d";+8S  
surgery were not available. YXrTm[P  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate &p8K0 |  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had )P:TVe9`  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been ouVR[w>V  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment +c} fDrr)  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 7k+UCi u>  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression tz1iabZ{  
model. The factors that remained significantly related |5e/.T$  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever L)8;96  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been iknBc-TLD  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors (d4z NYK  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate j,EE`g&  
model. bC?t4-W  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract ;op+~@*!  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with =ZzhH};aX  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 2x$\vL0  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort xx!o]D-}  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total KkJ cH U  
(years) (%) (%) (%) /A|ofAr)  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) Z0b1E  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) isWB)$q  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) uDH)0#  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) VaVKWJg$  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 0)k%nIhj  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) RTLu]Bry  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) 6$fC R  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) 9DKmXL  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) gqZ7Pro.  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) N4)& K[  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) ={={ W  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) x9-K}s]%  
Age-standardized 9dqD(S#C;"  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) ~NU~jmT2  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 asPD>jc  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% jD H)S{k  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, P,I3E?! j  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). P4R.~J ;8  
Outcomes of cataract surgery IK~ur\3  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior WYEvW<Hv  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were -lb}}z+/  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular c{||l+B  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular gj6"U {D  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Srol0D I  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of {D`F$=Dlw  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected  b$rBxe\  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% IQ2<Pinv  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes 2S!=2u +7  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, nU`vj`K   
P = 0.027). G >#L  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity g\ <Lb  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 4XX21<yn  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract IO v4Zx<)  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, `pII-dSC%  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ='soSnT  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 B<:i[~`7t  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this $5il] D`  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four N_/&xHw  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these Y;-"Z  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction NbkWy  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 3@6f %Dyj  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract (qohb0  
surgery. b3Y9  
DISCUSSION 0{AVH/S  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically .bL{fBTT~  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract U%w-/!p  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes I&>R]DV  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual {d^&$ ~  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and S1`+r0Fk~n  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is #c?\(qjWA  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, /xf %Rp4}  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract yVh]hL#4+w  
services throughout Australia. \>,{)j q;  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age o`G'E&  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is LX*T<|c`'  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous PX]A1Kt?  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye )G*H l^Z;4  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract ;O{AYF?,N  
between studies because of different methodologies and ??1V__w  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 6Y}#vZ  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 9"MC<  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of o{zo-:>Jp  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 3(FJ<,"D}  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity hiP^*5h  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. o*r\&!NIw  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the JNX7]j\  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. ;QgJw2G  
80 McCarty et al. zL)m!:_  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort DSET!F;PG  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total P8;|>OLZ)  
(years) (%) (%) (%) dw Aju:-H  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 4-cnkv\~  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( H!oP!rzEo  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) :ykQ[d`:|  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) M@{GT/`Pf  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) = #ocp  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) JH<q7Y6!y  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 5O*. qp?  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) FV:{lC{h~  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) rD<@$KpP  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 1 ht4LRFi  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) [/5>)HK} C  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) m<"1*d~  
Age-standardized cWh Aj>?_Q  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) f9OVylm  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract S>cT(q_&  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 0~n= |3*P  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 8+gSn  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the #lV&U  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude !BK^5,4?--  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the }$g5:k!  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). T[ky7\  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains QE-t v00  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 51&wH  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than C5;"mo-  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, #4~Ivj  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in i-tX5Md|  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, J,P7k$t2vv  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens S{ fNeK  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. QN*'MA"M  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable U/{cYX  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, > `z^AB   
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that +a;: 7[%&  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and nA% -<  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is X0P<ifIv  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 5n?fZ?6(  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement xr.fZMOh4  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We RHE< QG  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 1/ j}VC  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have <3ovCqa  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this l_QpPo!a  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their kj+AsQC ,  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants syBYH5  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the coU`2n/  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ \s+ <w3  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 9SMM%(3, r  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to [.|tD  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change QeU>%qKT  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function X~n Kuo  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in k6G23p[9  
overall quality of life.22 K;S&91V)=  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually va#~ \%`  
significant posterior capsule opacification following ,!u^E|24  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% Z`< +8e  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated Q/0;r{@Tq}  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear IKAF%0[R|j  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an ilpg()  
opaque capsule. \/{qE hP  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and kD"dZQx  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, f)N67z6  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We AE^&hH0^  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more !)_5z<   
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is BOfO$J}  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 /`2VJw  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 5C{X$7u  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of &[JI L=m5  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care NL2n\%n  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without %3"3OOT7  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the bCA3w%,k M  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated  Zp]Bs  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. _czLKbcF  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem + Y 3_)  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract qY#*zx  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will 0qJ 3@d  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the N9{ivq|fO  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in ~x>IN1Vci  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well " P0o)g+{  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 5nf|CQH6?  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. -c|O!Lc-  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract _FAwW<S4B  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for B(b[Dbb  
cataract extractions increases. ?;uzx7@F  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS =U|J{^ >I  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants Bg7?1m  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the APK@Oq  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 0Dh a1[=  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and y"7TO#  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 9n@jK%m  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal I0)iC[s8;  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. uiHlaMf  
REFERENCES hRc\&+#/  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. $OjsaE %  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. jzzVZ% t  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ,9W0fm \t  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population -pX/Tt6  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. W,wg@2  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 9f BD.9A  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 7d'@Z2%J0  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. wl(}F^:/`  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related n7{1m$/  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. U76:F?MH  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. Or6'5e?N  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye UDp"+nS  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population u45e>F=  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: B=n]N+  
363–71. fI}-?@  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. S93NsrBbY  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye QuF%m^aE  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. G.<9K9K  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ym,S /Uz  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient >@EQarD  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. '| Ag,x[  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 1X#`NUJ?2  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated %f:'A%'Qb  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. gvsS:4N"Nq  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. L6Ynid.k  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too a IqNNR  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ]~a!O  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: IXz ad  
77–80. j- A S {w  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice !)LR41>?  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? -R&h?ec  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. /Ee0S8!Z!1  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest RA\H?1;8C  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye n,AN&BZ  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic &4{%3w_/  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. =8 tdu B  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading L`"cu.l  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. v $ pA Rt  
82 McCarty et al. TF M} P  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & c 6?5?_ne  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. ]%mg(&p4  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume L(8Q%oX%o  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International # ^%'*/z  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 071w o7  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ?G8 D6  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. wvUph[j}J  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison _L: /2  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ~xHr/:  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment hW|t~|j#_  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. ~gX@2!D5k  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the Gt 2rJ<>  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health HVk3F| ]V  
Organization, 1997. rc;| ,\  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, !(o)*S  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation uF< F4m;  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. >iG`  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. 1"!<e$&$X  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 7p~@S4  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ^pg5o)M  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. 9V P|a-  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Q2Q`g`*O:  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated :jUd?(  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. kvo741RO6  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. "+)ey> _  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract vKI,|UD&-  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 4q~l ?*S  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. Bp4QHv9xqL  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. ); $~/H4  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to AWf zMJ;VS  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. MiRMjQ2  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. WM >9sJf  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A r]8B6iV  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule K` U\+AE  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ; /EH@V|  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. tfdP#1E  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health L5e aQu  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8.  snN1  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in \DfvNeF  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, o 'yR^`  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract )iEK7d^-  
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