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: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT Kmv+1T0,  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ld7v3:M  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to !\;FNu8_.  
unoperated cataract in Australia. aCxE5$~$  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual NwR}yb6  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than eD Z8w  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 2kUxD8BcN  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography A &9(mB  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who T!}[yW  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater cFF*Z=L _  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or [ dE. [  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. 'iY*6<xS<  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne e~T@~(fft  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 nPgeLG"00  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria <(e8sNe  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract :ECi+DxBK  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had =_8Tp~j  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 i o3yLIy,  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber  X}6#II  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Sj(F3wY  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated oQj=;[  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or ^-M^gYBR  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven ag4`n:1  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate Pu>N_^  C  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 1 Ee>S\9t  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% i NWC6y  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone ]> Y/r-!  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an #m8sK(#lo  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision r++i=SQax  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no )J3kxmlzQ  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural #rYENR[  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance p11G#.0  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated (w2= 2$  
cataract. w9#R'  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is ^i:\@VA:  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced C/v}^#cLD  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of Z]-WFU_ N  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes Dr"/3xm  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ?|t/mo|K?  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health }&G]0hCT!  
services accessibility, prevalence +CTmcbyOi  
INTRODUCTION Ud3""C5B  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in j.QHkI1.  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all Qm);6X   
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate nN ~GP"}  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be O2H/rFx4  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 c d%hW  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting x9}++r  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is s[-]cHQ  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in vbn> mg5  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists `Ei"_W  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather La}o(7 =s  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral Wg1 tip8s  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has %\yK5V5  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for B+D`\Nlo  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has h[l{ 5Z*  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ~_}4jnC  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is &PWf:y{R`  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the fm6]CU1^  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract fMB4xbpD  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence ?zE<  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors R`7n^,  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to X)NWX9^;'  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. <tQXK;  
METHODS (lb`#TTG x  
Study population ZE ^u.>5  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual 'Ix5,^M}B  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 K*[0dza$  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to KPg[- d  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. @d P~X  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of DlS&qFs  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen (mY(\mu}  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites C*]AL/  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. _dY:)%[]  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 v6KL93  
Original Article i~ROQMN1  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia _i.({s&_9  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD _4~k3%w\`l  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia "{mt?  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, %pd5w~VP  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au IZ|c <#r6  
78 McCarty et al. rkbl/py  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural IBzHR[#,^  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural uFMs ^^#  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify rK*hTjVn  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a nz}]C04:-  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of sn2r >m3  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, DIL)7K4  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ;CLR{t(N#V  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. |Tj`qJGVw  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local 2#,8evH  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. ~:R4))qpg  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian Oz_b3r  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. Xcs8zT  
Assessment of cataract PEMxoe<+  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 6nM rO$i0k  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine H&"_}  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the $Ui]hA-:?y  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 54, Ju'r  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and "j *fVn  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on Z&2 &wD  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) ;,[EJR^CI  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, +_vm\]4  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, J tn&o"C  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than rd f85%%7  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to *<#]&2I  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual d#M?lS>  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, uWM4O@Qn)d  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ?CL  z@u~  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to F ~11 _  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the (RI>aDG RH  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight @Reh?]# v  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the d- _93  
analyses. -&HoR!af  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., g tSHy*3]  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in (\AszLW  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. f/|a?n2\hm  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman rkER`  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph ^{:[^$f:l  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were ,YzC)(-  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ^AC+nko*  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 {U2| ):  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately q@=#`746e  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated yO69p  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies TBLk+AR  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were 62KW HB9S  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, Ij,?G*  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph u8)r W  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical 6!Ap;O^*  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) $DMu~wwfG  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to RM=+ZmA  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. W,eKQV<j  
Assessment of risk factors - G2M;]Cn  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information {b8Y-  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 FWx*&y~$  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration b`%e{99\  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 4Fht (B|  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension g 0_r  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and '/)_{Ly  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were sA7K ;J})  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to [T&y5"@  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants /bj`%Q.n  
and use of vitamin supplements. rsj}hS$  
Data management and statistical analysis i!-sbwd7  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a ?26[%%  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, G U/k^ Qy  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or #6Ph"\G/  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at .VV!$; FB  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms \O4=mJ  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and K#yH\fn8  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ~x\ Q\Cxp  
checks were performed on the entire data set. mT$tAwzTC{  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was [vT,zM  
employed for statistical analyses. 7!r`DZ"yF  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific r+yLK(<zp  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to d'J?QH!N0  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five T8 oASg!  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Nd)o1 {I  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific t;6/bT-  
data were weighted according to the 1996 0`=?ig _  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 6lFsN2  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. [K QZHIe  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared a}{! %5  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated ]d(}b>gR~(  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted *a@UV%u  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the q>Y[.c-  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. ShxX[k  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically , iy   
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use b@Cvs4  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The aT[7L9Cw  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment Rl8-a8j$f.  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with F*H}5yBp_:  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence -t?G8,,  
limits. #U6qM(J  
RESULTS }% *g\%L  
Study population +f+yh0Dj  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 /|f]L9)2<  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) B*7o\~5  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did 8!fw Xm  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was =G :H)i  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as P8f-&(  
a whole. 511q\w M  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to lVHJ}(<'p  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 2_C .-;!  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to *k -UQLJ  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 5l#)tX.by  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 1A `u0Y$g  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. @B6[RZR  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery v*pVcBY>  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases AyUVsIuPT=  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any p5\b&~ g  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). JT+P>\\];'  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three G(>a LF  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence _F9 c.BH  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes ZyG528O22  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% qluyJpt  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract g?ft;kR6S  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract I/adzLQ  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall No?pv"  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was L(L;z'3y  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). ]du pU"VV  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract WE3l*7<@  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified s<myZ T$  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated g)zy^ aDf  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents MxYCMe4S[  
as information about risk factor exposure was not ^vzNs>eJ  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 9T\:ID= h  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence \ZA%"F){  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic qYE-z( i  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a >q`G?9d2  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use A&z  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private TO QvZ?_  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, b747eR 7E  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. "kMpa]<c-6  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the sYvO"|  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having ztf(.~  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract &cZD{Z  
surgery were not available. xD1w#FMlQs  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate S wQb"  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had srUpG&Bcx  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been ^58'*13ZL  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment .a$][Jny  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant TzVNZDQ`Jl  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression k)'c$  
model. The factors that remained significantly related 2OEO b,`  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever RzXxnx)]q  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been  y!!p:3  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors [&6l=a  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate Z|E( !"zE9  
model. H+F'K XP*K  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract a(!:a+9WOP  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with t[%9z6t  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 R|Y)ow51  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort \3Ys8umKq  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total tvZpm@1  
(years) (%) (%) (%) ^2XoYgv  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) "C%;9_ig$  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) TAIcp*)ZM  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ~%m-}Sxc  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 1P@&xcvS\  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) g.Z>9(>;Y  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) "EDn;l-Q  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) aa8WRf  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) 26&^n Uy  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) Xq 1n1_Z  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) [-=PK\ B  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) 48Z{wV,  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) %HpTQ   
Age-standardized <{JHFU`^  
(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) Gmf.lHr$%  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 0,{Dw9 W:  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% ]+{Cy\*kR  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, X )$3sTj  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). EL;IrtU  
Outcomes of cataract surgery mpIRe@#Z  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior A\ CtM`  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were e%afK@c  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular =hH>]$J[  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular lc,{0$ 1<  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact b54<1\&  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of {Nuwz|Ci  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected No=Ig-It  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% s7A{<>:  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes |<96H8  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 5wmH3g#0  
P = 0.027). 1Thr74M  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity s/Fc7V!;  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without Oz# $ x  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract fIu5d6;'  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, "WdGY*r  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the R rs?I,NV  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 2 :u4~E3  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this #o SQWC=T  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four BC ]^BKP  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these *91iFeKj=  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 0}2Uj>!i  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one _iLXs  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract Z $ Fh4  
surgery. w|pk1~c(_  
DISCUSSION <"{Lv)4  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 5V!L~#  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract }jBr[S5  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ;n$j?n+|  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 3Q*K+(`{  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and gRIRc4p  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is \~UyfVPRT  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, d|k6#f-E  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ny%-u &1k  
services throughout Australia. e;~[PYeu  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age 7r 07N'  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is QFU;\H/  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 3C 84b/A  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye v^2K=f[nE  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract &1YAPxX  
between studies because of different methodologies and Y,I0o{,g  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well jG)fM?  
as the different age structures of the study populations. | VPs5  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of P0uUVU=B|  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. " NnUu 8x  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity GV#"2{t j  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. +Rn]6}5m\  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the 9i GUE  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. gfG Mu0FjB  
80 McCarty et al. Z y _A3m{  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort DcaVT]"  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total .vYU4g]  
(years) (%) (%) (%) \L}aTCvG  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) P,lKa.  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( lg FA}p@  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) .)~IoIW=  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) I!3qb-.Q  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) VCfa<hn  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) kaf4GME]  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) !PJD+SrG  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) _]:wltPv  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) Tl"GOpH\]  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) s"*ZQ0OaD  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ]pr(hk  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) Jk=E"I6  
Age-standardized ~/s(.oji  
(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) s<,[xkMB  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 0Snl_@s  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. pv) ;LjF  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 #rnO=N8  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ? IgM=@  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude 8U}BSM_<2  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the +Y;/10p  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). /J{ e _a  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains n<RvL^T=  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban $OEhdz&Fi  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than esE5#Yq4.k  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, BPRhGG|9j  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in .3Ex=aQcX  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, eru2.(1  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens {[B^~Y>Lr  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. )Pr*\<Cld  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable um.s :vj$  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, w]2tb  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Py?EA*(d#  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and }?PvNK]",  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is F"2rX&W  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted H#P)n R M  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement x.gRTR`7(  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We r7dvj#^  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction c:;m BS>~  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have aX`@WXK  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this /m>%=_nz  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their ^uG^XY&ItC  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 3RYg-$NK[  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the ZAK NyA2  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ Y@ &1[Z  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their /Q|guJx  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to N\ Nwmx  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 'a&(r;  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function WziX1%0$n  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in -;VKtBXP</  
overall quality of life.22 S`N_},  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually ?/EyfTex  
significant posterior capsule opacification following Y(:.f-Du  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% /CXrxeo  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated /Ah|Po  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear =CCxY7)M+.  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an Dg:2*m_!j{  
opaque capsule. {e>E4 (  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and GpW5)a  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, oH[4<K>  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We ao@"j}c  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more '[XtARtY`  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ^p'iX4M  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 Hg~O0p}[  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any M-  f)\`I  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of |'C {nTX  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ]#UyYgPk  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without # U46Au  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the x B%Felz  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated K):MT[/"  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. p6qza @  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem G= [ =[o\  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract b r"4 7i  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will Anpx%NVo  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the B& tU~  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in ?qn0].  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well SiD [54OM  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes *AO^oBeY  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. 1NP(3yt%  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract 5`$.GV  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for !y8/El  
cataract extractions increases. _L?`C  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4t( V)1+  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants piZ0KA"  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the A4}6hG#  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell &cty&(2p  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and g~5$X{  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient hpftVEB  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal Ppw0vaJ^  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. /cPe zX  
REFERENCES aS^ 4dEJ  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. b)+;#m  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. (Rqn)<<2  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, nLn3kMl4  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population C;#-2^h  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. wS*An4%G  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens Wb*A};wE  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated Zt3"4d4  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. f(Vr&X  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related _K(w &Kr  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. *]<M%q!<6  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. 5Jo><P a  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye {)E )&lL  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population Gqe?CM  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: zGtWyXP  
363–71. xcBV,[E{  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. J2rw4L  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye [PVem  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. YNEPu:5J  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. j<H5i}  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient gP&G63^  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ZbmBwW_ 7  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 1}O&q6\"J  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated O$<m(~[S  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. >_R,^iH"  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. teRK#: .P  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too lB7 V4  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 8G GC)2  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: IP #w  
77–80. s&>U-7fx"  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice !CJh6X !  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ,{tz%\, %  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. bSK> p3  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest OrN~ Y#D  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye aPR0DZ@  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic @;^7kt  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. Ub>Pl,~'  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading UKfC!YR2J8  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. erhxZ|."P  
82 McCarty et al. F<W`zQ46  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & am+'j5`Ys  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. XGs d"UW  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume !)!<. x  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International Or({|S9d2  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. f@G3,u!]i  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ~7kIe+V  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. -GqMis}c  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison R)[ l 3  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ?zS t  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment JA")L0a_  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. vX9B^W||x  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the | e&v;48  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health Vm3e6Y,K  
Organization, 1997. |Z"5zL10  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, L\`uD  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation gG>|5R0  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. >3{l"SPU  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. dx<KZR$!V  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of qaj~q(j~ C  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative dHAI4Yf4U  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. ]O\m(of R  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. z. 6-D  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated H7I&Ky  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. L{2KK]IF  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. O6P{+xj$  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract _a?(JzLw5  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and :*/'W5iM  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. T&/ ]|4  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. iaq+#k@V  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to C `>1x`n  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. pKxq\ U  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5.  $O)fHD'  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A Oh|KbM*vS  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule p1O[QQ|  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. q#mw#Uw-  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. qkLp8/G>pO  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ;:%*h2  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. Ul/Uk n$  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 1dl@2CVS  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, j&c YRKpz  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract whoQA }X>  
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:
4+6=? 正确答案:10
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交