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 RKwuvVI  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes LqoH]AcN  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to hpz DQ6-Y  
unoperated cataract in Australia. (zIF2qY  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual t[X,m]SX  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than 4 |xQQv  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination \v p^[,SI  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography |k=5`WG  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who !-s6B  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater <M M(Z  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or js)I%Z  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. trM)&aQto  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne SOQR(UT  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 Rmh u"N/q  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria jQY ^[A  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract f4&k48Ds  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had P*9L3R*=N  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 KAm$^N5  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber ~ ]^<*R  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber :hUt7/3c  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated l8By2{pN  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or O%rt7qV"g2  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 07A2@dx  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate bTc'E#  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 3R ZD=`  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 02~GT_)$^  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone G M>Ms!Y  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an HD9+4~8  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision h/\/dp/tt  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no 2[yfo8H  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural  iT&Y9  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance n]J;BW& Av  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated YOY{f:ew  
cataract. lr&O@ 5"oy  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is @-5V~itW  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced h|Udw3N1L  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of S`Wau/7t  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes  ICXz(?a  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. C9}m-N  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health e8$OV4X  
services accessibility, prevalence g)#.|d+  
INTRODUCTION ?ZlN$h^  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ;+iw?"  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all +5IC-= ZB  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Zlf) dDn  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be Jb"0P`senY  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 xlU:&=|  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting xyc`p[n &  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is @$%[D`Wa<  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in u &s>UkR  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists XH{P@2~l  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather b<?A  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral l Vc':,z  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has @8qo(7<~Q  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for t+`>zux5(T  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has ]^ "BLbDZ@  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 biw2 f~V  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is 0-a[[hL?  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the v a j  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract yM-3nwk  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence *{e?%!Q  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors G0VbW-`O  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to M<"H1>q@  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. xfJ&11fG2  
METHODS ]iL>Zxex  
Study population 4+j:]poYG{  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual =ijVT_|u0  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 o(_~ st<  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to L-v-KO6  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. K4>nBvZ?v  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of o$FYCz n  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen jWL;ElM'  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites >UUT9:,plA  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. Kc[Y .CH  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 :P1/kYg  
Original Article o}4J|@Hi|4  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ttaYtV]]  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD ,*Z:a 4  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia XdR^,;pWE  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, )5(Ko <"  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au a6vls]?  
78 McCarty et al. HECZZnM  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural uI*2}Q   
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural Q:4euhz*  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify $sX X6K),  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a `mfN3Q*[c  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of d].(x)|st  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, EN!Q]O|  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of STxreW1  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. "7T9d)  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local &oyj8  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. Pd[&&!+gV  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian ,Q5Z<\  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. X+*"FKm S.  
Assessment of cataract Dm.tYG  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after z'FJx2  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine zU7/P|Dw+  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the z^q ~|7  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using HP /@ _qk  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and #q5 L4uM9  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on 0y"Ra%Y  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) %Z"I=;=nxI  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, Yc*Ex-s  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, NzP5s&,C69  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than y^SDt3Am  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to #!WD1a?L  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual -Xw i}/OX  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, >J \}&!8,  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 9? #pqw  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to cS'|c06  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the KH<f=?b  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight f0^DsP   
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the f_&bwfbo  
analyses. k3 65.nc  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., z8ox#+l  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in ?G#T6$E8  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. Dm"@59x  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman L b'HM-d  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph C>?`1d@  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were %Q}T9%Mtj  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera Gj.u /l  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 8?L7h\)-  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately ;n9r;$!f  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated -L&FguoVB  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies qw!_/Z3[  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were i_? S#L]h  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, 2VNMz[W'  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph M-Az2x;6  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical tr]=q9  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) m#E%, rT  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to (Ut)APM  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. p~T)Af<(  
Assessment of risk factors USKa6<:{W  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information a!1\,.  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 '$]u?m  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration K% ) K$/A  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, PXZ ZPW/  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension dv+)U9at  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and Y5}<7s\UDO  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were 7 I/  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 3H0~?z_  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants IH;+pN  
and use of vitamin supplements. MCOz-8@|Y  
Data management and statistical analysis &></l| hY  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a Nw`}iR0i  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, N798("  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or vHY."$|H  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at lNcXBtwK@#  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms @$R[Js%MuO  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and sv<U$M~)X  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Rc2|o.'y  
checks were performed on the entire data set. DwXzmp[qWH  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was P +U=/$o  
employed for statistical analyses. 0hTv0#j#  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific bgW=.s  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to DP=4<ES%+  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 7/.-dfEK  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates \de82 4  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific zG_e=   
data were weighted according to the 1996 KmoPFlw  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the t'@1FA!)  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. gkdd#Nrk  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared K252l,;|  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated B;A^5~b  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted OO.. Y  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the (\ `knsE!  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 73?ZB+\)0A  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically FL 5u68  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use #/'5 N|?  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The Cj?X+#J/@d  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment @`<vd@  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with L^:+8g  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence >Z k$q~'+  
limits. cT abZc  
RESULTS hETTD%  
Study population K29]B~0%E  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 yW.s?3X  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) $\>GQ~k  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did yyJ4r}TE  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was N%{&%C6{  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as :_YpS w<Q  
a whole. :UmY|=v?t  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to @)mH"u!(7  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The (9x8,f0z  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to c F_hU"  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural V2kNJwwk  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)  gc@,lNmi  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. ?#^(QR|/  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 4J*%$Vxv  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases s }q6@I  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any Hs<vC L \  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). 'M2Jw8i  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three Oa=0d;_  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence eX$P k:  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes g]O"l?xx1D  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% rJK3;d?E  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract jJ86Ch  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract (</cu$w>H)  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall `V[{(&?,n  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was t5 n$sF  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). G@b|{!  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract 'Uqz,  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified z>+@pj   
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated aB~?Y+m  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 9r% O  
as information about risk factor exposure was not -sl] funRy  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed =xFw4 D9  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence `yJpDGh  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic <m"Zk k  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ?)k;.<6  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use k2muHKBlk  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private H\AJLk2E  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ?"[b408-  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. dX-Xzg  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the %JmSCjt`G  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having %{g<{\@4(;  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract 7 7"'?  
surgery were not available. {j.5!Nj]B  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate LC) -aw>-  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had .4pWyqU)!  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been .zO/8y(@  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment DYkNP: +  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 0q(}nv  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression XqMJe'%r  
model. The factors that remained significantly related {b~l [  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever #Q}`kFB`  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been .^0@^%Wi  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors { [ QCuR  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate &u0JzK  
model. Z}6   
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract Q[J%  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 5SKj% %B2,  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 xG i,\K\:  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort +x$GwX  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total "HSAwe`5jU  
(years) (%) (%) (%) eSNi6RvE  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) zX{K\yp  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) 57*`y'C W  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 6?u9hi  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) -:]_DbF  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) V'y,{YpP  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) R: 8\z0"L*  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) jt5en;AA[  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) v;4l*)$)  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) H|&[,&M>  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) ,x#5.Koz  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) P5/\*~}  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) b`M  2VZu  
Age-standardized ^ 'W<|  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) eP6`"<UM  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 uR#aO''  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% ^5n"L2 9V  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 6 2{(i'K  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). =y)e&bj  
Outcomes of cataract surgery +zM WIG  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior Kxs_R#k  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Qf0]7  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular mOm_a9M L  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular M@\A_x(Mas  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact J${'?!N  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of BC|=-^(  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected XNODDH   
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% k0[b4cr`  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes $,Q0ay  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, @APv?>$)  
P = 0.027). j 0^% 1  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity !$}:4}56F  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 2/[J<c\G  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract {,V.IDs8[  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, :2+,?#W  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the |%p;4b  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 \q2:1X |  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this QYl Pr&O9  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four Fog4m=b`g  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these =~qQ?;o n  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction #J4{W84B  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one #kho[`9  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract +MHsdeGU1W  
surgery. &`]Lg?J  
DISCUSSION Q&Q$;s3|Y  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically . #+N?D<  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract j.}@9  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes Ii*tux!S  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual "e)C.#3  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and q oA?  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is '+ %<\.$  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, ,Z_aZD4  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract PIo8mf/  
services throughout Australia. 397IbZ\  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age whoM$  &  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is =x_~7 Xc{  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous  /y2)<{{I  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 9n\b!*x  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract ~tw#Q   
between studies because of different methodologies and @^O+ulLJ,]  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well }3%L3v&  
as the different age structures of the study populations. Un~ }M/  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 6ct'O**k*&  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. XWuHH;~*L  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity t9C.|6X  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. VuU{7:  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the +VE ] .*T  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. > 14 x.c  
80 McCarty et al. 2oO&8:`tv  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort Oh&k{DWE$  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total 9/yE\p .  
(years) (%) (%) (%) hxT{!g  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) WP}NHz4H  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( btG+Ak+K*  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17)  << XWL:  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) _ Vo35kA  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) ZcQ@%XY3~  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) Y|3n^%I  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) SJ%h.u@&@F  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) gfPR3%EXs  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) CAJ]@P#Xj+  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) }w|a^=HAp  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) izvwXC  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) _U<r @  
Age-standardized .7`c(9<  
(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) p~evPTHnrX  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract #Rj&PzBe  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. @dHQ}Ni  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 R2Y.s^  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the a49xf^{1"i  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude |z 8Wh  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 4\pUA4  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Z'cL"n\9R]  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains >s;>"]  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban +\yQZ{4'@  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than Q|] 9  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ?H0"*8C?Y  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in gc[BP>tl\  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, qHf8z;lc  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens wticA#mb  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. $8;`6o`  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable RK\$>KFE  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ?(2^lH~6h  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that S uo  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Wu|AN c  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is 0)HZ5^J  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted NU/:jr.W#  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement ^,sKj-  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We nm{J  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction Qs #7<NQ  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have Sf"]enwB  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this < /\y<]b  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Re]7G.y  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants Cj3C%W  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the sF!nSr  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ >oasA2S  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their fKQq]&~ H  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to >u/ T`$  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change D)){"Q!b  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function >j}.~$6dj_  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in =ec"G 2$?"  
overall quality of life.22 [~U CYYl  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually TBr@F|RXiO  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 2nkUvb%=  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% qpZR-O  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated uYy&<_r  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear A .>L>uR  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an s!eB8lkcT  
opaque capsule. m{{ 8#@g  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and JR^#NefJ  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, j _p|>f<}  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We w\(; >e@  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more alz2F.%Y  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ~3r}6,%  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 +L>?kr[i[  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any *r|)@K|  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of \Zbi` ;m?  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care vzPuk|q3  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without HI%#S&d  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the .Mz'h 9@  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated %9Y3jB",2  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. [r f.&  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 1C]mxV=%  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ]46#u=y~3  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will LktH*ePO  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the 3,[#%}1(S  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in `%nj$-W:  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well /@`kM'1:  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes h.WvPZ2U  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. q{E44 eQ7F  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract T=D| jt  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 7v{s?h->$  
cataract extractions increases. c3]X#Qa#m$  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2ms@CQy(00  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants b<1+q{0r  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the Yv ZcG3@c3  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 2?./S)x)  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and `Eq~W@';Q0  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient '#Pg:v_  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal (m%A>e B  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. DJ.n8hne  
REFERENCES 6X`i*T$.  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. ~+OAAkJ9  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. &K@ RTgb  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, Ap)[;_9BD  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population vWpoaz/w  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. S%{^@L+V  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens RW I7eC  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ]R?{9H|jwE  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. HJ^SqSm  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related i$ CN{c*  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. !]*Cwbh. u  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. o +KDK{MD  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye 5% )<e-  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population <g3)!VR^q  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 4M,Q{G|e  
363–71. |0N6]%r  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. RJhafUJ zH  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye i&_&4  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. IMcuoQ5  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. rU!QXg]uD  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ~4^~w#R  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ~OSgpM#O!T  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. [Zxv&$SQ  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated @]F1J  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. CyXFuk!R  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. )Bw}T  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too z&KrG  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal "&Rt&S  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: o|G[/o2  
77–80. c$P68$FB  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 7U647G(Sg  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? euiP<[|h=  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. A~)#  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest NXHe;G  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye slTE.  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic 4^(aG7  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. *hvC0U@3  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading i@m@]-2  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. "K c/Cs2[  
82 McCarty et al. ;V0^uB.z  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & c]%~X&Tg`  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. K; Fs5|gFU  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume oH='\M%+  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International g^: & Dh  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. !rsGCw!Pg  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and SceK$  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. z5p5=KOb  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison  35%\"Y?  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased BIh^b?:zU  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment '\M]$`Et  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. Ji4JP0  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the #w@V!o  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health J'C9}7G  
Organization, 1997. ?DGg.2f  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, FrC)2wX  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation N 9W,p 2  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. p1UYkmx[  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. sBk|KG  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of =m;,?("7t3  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative yV*jc`1  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. v{SZ(;  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. xLSf /8e  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated h S)lQl:^  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ,N1pww?  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. y* :C~  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract KM"BHaSkF  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and ,rV;T";r  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. iG#9 2e4  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. (8baa.ge  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to EM(%|#  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. K~4bT=   
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. Id1de>:;  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A eA*We  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule 7K ~)7U  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. CaV@<T  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. m>|7&l_  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health * mH&Gn1  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. pedyWA>  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in , `PYU[  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, M3Qi]jO98  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract =KAN|5yn  
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:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交