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 ?;q  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes &efwfnG<  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to iC$mb~G  
unoperated cataract in Australia. Pc{0Js5VzE  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual [~%\:of70n  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than o<pb!]1  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination $L@os2  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography kS\A_"bc  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Os9;;^k  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 6wmMg i_m  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or t%B ,ATW  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. %wc=Mf  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne f{[] m(X;  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 uyp| Xh,  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ?6m6 4{M  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract b }^ylm  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had CP%?,\  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 jRhOo% p  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 2$Fy?08q  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber L{2KK]IF  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated &4m\``//9  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or 9"#,X36  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven Kt 0 3F$  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate `<3/k  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 1R e5)Y:i  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 5y1:oiE/  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone A<+veqb4  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an \?|FB~.Ry  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision >7fNxQ  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no v&8%t 7|  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural LzS)WjEN  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance @u.%z# h"1  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated $4&%<'l3I  
cataract. y|e@z f  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is ]{/1F:bcQ  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced :B(vk3;U!  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of Ha} TdQ%  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes &rj)Oh2  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. lV*dQwa?i  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health & t1Uk[  
services accessibility, prevalence 5g-AB`6T  
INTRODUCTION wS)2ymRg  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 3T|xUY)G4  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all T08SG B]  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate TrEo5 H;  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be t@Bl3Nt{  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 a9"1a'  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting k|Syw ATr  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 8vK$]e36  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in C =sEgtEI  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists aYBc )LCd  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather [ 1$p}x  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral u@{z xYn  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ]8c%)%Vi  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for hbOyrjan x  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has ,?k~>,{3  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 wt(Hk6/B  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is #AN]mH  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the v"K #  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ^F e %1Lnt  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence V(^aG=TaW:  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors }5??n~:*5  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to tS@J)p+_(  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. z K+C&X  
METHODS _^(}6o  
Study population w9W0j  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual \H -,^[G3  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 6bacU#0o  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to ))<1"7D^^  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ET 1>&l:.  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of VGPBD-6)  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 9wB}EDZ  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites W bP wO  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. (0c L! N;;  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 =/6rX"\P  
Original Article )dMXn2O  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia rF*L@HI  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD DsI{*#  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia &AS<2hB  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, F-g7*  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au U&\2\z3{  
78 McCarty et al. u]Eyb),Gy  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural yE80*C~d  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural |fd}B5!c  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify Z ^w5x:  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a +=qazE<:0  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of < "8<<   
the household census, basic information about age, sex, uINm>$G,5  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of bktw?{h  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. DKzP)!B "  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local  Du*O|  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. pH'1be{K  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 2S{IZ]  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. @NY$.K#]  
Assessment of cataract Ijs"KAW ?  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after ^&|$&7  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine .).*6{_  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ~5f|L(ODX  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 7fB:wPlG;  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 0aF&5Lk`y  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on luEP5l2&  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) 0tzMu#  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, @$ea-fK??  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, Hsoe?kUHF  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 6}vPwI  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to @+S5"W  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual KLc<c1BZ  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, bN#)F    
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. r}gp{Pf7e  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ~IB~>5U!  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the $g|/.XH%  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight qX(sx2TK  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ye9-%~sjX  
analyses. z]NN ^pIa  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., TV>UD q  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in ?1I0VA']  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. %rz.>4i)(  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman wHQyMq^  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph l6X\.oI  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were C?Sy 90f  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera XK)qDg  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 hr8v O"tZN  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately &}1PH% 6  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated \pzqUTk  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies W@^O'&3d  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were aF:_1. LC  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, -P09u82  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 0ih=<@1K  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical dpO ZqhRs.  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) -vXX u;frt  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to #:v e3gWl  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. m~fA=#l l  
Assessment of risk factors K h}Oiw  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information Fz_SID  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 "lo:"y(u  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration {XMF26C#  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, r*K[,  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension ;zD1#dD  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and \: H&.VQ"  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ic:_v?k  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to .17WF\1HC.  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 5-Vdq  
and use of vitamin supplements.  _2VL%  
Data management and statistical analysis vMsb@@O\\  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a ( w(GJ/g  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, c|[:vin  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or RLN>*X  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at }vkrWy^  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms Lrgv:n  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and >&mlwxqv  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Kd8V,teH  
checks were performed on the entire data set. P SDzs\ s  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was |:SBkM,  
employed for statistical analyses. SF2A?L?}+  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific .%7#o  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to UH1AT#?!W  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 9"g=it2Rh6  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates a;J{'PHu  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific [#>ji+%=  
data were weighted according to the 1996 & IVwm"  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 7u]0dHj  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. {x e$  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared 0S <;T+WA  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated "Zd4e2>{M\  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted Tx%6whd/'  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 8Czy<}S<G  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. #/zPAcV:  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically euO!+9p  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use YHN@?}T()  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The |[n- H;0  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment n<6p0w  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with fyIL/7hzf4  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 3+_? /}<  
limits. _sIhQ8$:  
RESULTS 8`Fo ^c=j  
Study population BX&bhWYGFX  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 dxbP'2~  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) _7>$'V{  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did }Z*@EWc>  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was I#QBJ#  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as @K/}Ob4   
a whole. \tTZ N  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to bFk >IifN  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The Qi`Lj5;\F  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to  $6w[h7  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural Cw]& B  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 4VINu9\V  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. s @sRdoTdF  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 62K7afH  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases T8E=}!68w}  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any rLO1Sv  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). r# MJ  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three rtf\{u9 }g  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence =4cK9ac  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes O\;Z4qn2=  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% GlYNC&,VL  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract y?j#;n0  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 'PRsZ`x.  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall j:K>3?   
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was s^+h >  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). <EFA^,3t%  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract asqbLtQ  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified .&dW?HS  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated  (`PgvBL:  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents AE!DftI  
as information about risk factor exposure was not KM$L u2  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed }SYR)eE\  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence U_ n1QU  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic v3!oY t:l  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 0o~? ]C  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 9TRS#iVL+*  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private &}:'YK*X  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ^=:e9i3u  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. -t~l!! N(  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the BM5+;h !  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having S}6Ty2.\  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract vYQ0e:P  
surgery were not available. @9_H4V  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ^R- -&{I  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had =@(&xfTC  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been JDPn   
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 87WIDr  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant "ee:Z_Sz  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression Er/h:=  
model. The factors that remained significantly related nmI os]B  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever U hKC:<%  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been kT6h}d^/^  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors |a 9d]^  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate q?} /q  
model. x(oL\I_Z  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract 9e|-sn  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with l;{n" F  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Jw13 Wb-  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort >YG1sMV-J  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total MLD1%* &0  
(years) (%) (%) (%) @yc/1u $r  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) -u)f@e  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) \j C[|LM&  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ogD 8qrZ6J  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) K"Vo'9R[_  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) WX.6|  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) NTq#'O) f  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) \Af25Mcf:  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ,uz+/K%OA5  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 5e )2Jt:  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) O*qSc^9q  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) ^YVd^<cE  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ad <z+a  
Age-standardized .T!R&#]n  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) Pv-El+e!  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 D,$!.5OA  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% =yT3#A~<G  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, /NE<?t N  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). <V`1?9c7D1  
Outcomes of cataract surgery +-%&,>R  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ucP"<,a  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were `5SLo=~  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular fRcs@yZnS  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular .$o0$`}  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact |gV$ks\<  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of G`;YB  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 6 b/UFO  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% d17RJW%A  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes M53{e;.kN  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 9` a1xnL  
P = 0.027). h4iz(*  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity |qOoL*z  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without Rfx}[!<{N  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract $>M-oNeC  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, qOqU CRUe:  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ;h"St0   
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 bb4 `s0  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this Au\j6mB  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four ,N1I\f  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these f, iHM  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 6 3NhD  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one <E&8g[x6  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract !H^e$BA  
surgery. x b (Cd  
DISCUSSION b%TLvV 9F  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically /QW-#K|S&  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract n5U-D0/Q  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes AzZb0wW6p  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual FhFP M)[  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and +oRBSAg-  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is ]n 'FD|  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, Hs#q 7  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract Ve9*>6i&-4  
services throughout Australia. ;!9-I%e  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age DQ`\HY  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is LD gGVl  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 50R&;+b  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye A>Y#-e;<d  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract T\OpPSYbl  
between studies because of different methodologies and $gPR3*0  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well iebnQf  
as the different age structures of the study populations. @\?QZX(H  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 2S@aG%-)  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. Ch0t'  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity =C4!h'hz  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. +'ADN!(B_  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ^77X?nDz=h  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. di|5|bn7  
80 McCarty et al. e .(  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 9~|hGo  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Rdj/n :  
(years) (%) (%) (%) ;vp[J&=  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) yr[HuwU  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( Q$:>yveR*  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) ATkx_1]KM-  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) }WM!e"  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) b Sm*/Q  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 8=DZ;]XD.  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) D&/~lhyNZ  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) X{-901J1  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) ~`!{5:v  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) x2$Y"b?vz  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) OD yKS;   
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) DEN (pA\  
Age-standardized .:A&5Y-   
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) bc% N !d  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract WX}pBmU  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. .NRSBk  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 +H6 cZ,  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ;(0|2I'"  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude WEsX+okj  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the i_ z4;%#?  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ' "I-! +  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains p$!Q?&AV/  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban g;._Q   
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than D?`|`Mu  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, L`n Ma   
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in Q%.F Mf  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, ty-erdsP  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens o@@, }  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. 4#Id0['  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable jQ&82X%m  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, VB&`g<  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that xQ~N1Y2W  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and q&d5V~q  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is |]+PDc%  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted [a!*m<  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement &p_V<\(%  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 1 TA\6a}  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction Io\tZXB  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have P^J#;{R  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this mz?1J4rt  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 6:3F,!J!  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ]JvZ{fA%*  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the ' T%70)CM~  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ E-"b":@:  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their +~f5dJyk`  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to M.0N`NmS  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change P2=u-{?~  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function .j^=]3  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in t^SND{[WcM  
overall quality of life.22 .$N8cYu0  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually 4">C0m;ks  
significant posterior capsule opacification following p$1y8Zbor  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% &7Lg) PG  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated NW`L6wgl  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear {LoNp0i1a  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an cByUP#hW  
opaque capsule. ;b;Bl:%?  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and J[jzkzSu`  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, -Ta| qQa  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We ql(~3/kA_  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more [6cf$FS9  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is -@?4Tfl  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 2 3*OuY  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any v/~Lfi  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of -i*]Sgese  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ]/c!;z  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without c);vl%  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the U]64HuL  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated W:V.\  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. -mqL[ h,  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem U}^`R,C  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract R-OQ(]<*  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will @\|Fd)  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the {I]>!V0j!  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in )kvrQ6  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well A!IZIT5)m  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes BT* {&'\/  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. { \ ]KYI0  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract %eW2w@8]  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for wrAcVR  
cataract extractions increases. *IIuGtS  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS kadw1sYj  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants z4wG]]Kh*  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the L-VisZ-FK  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell UYvdzCUh  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 6@-O#,]J  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient ,QPo%{:p  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal '.IR|~Y  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. ?$~5ti#\  
REFERENCES 5;X3{$y  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. }$@E pM  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. _l=X?/  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, OpLUmn  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population yt#~n _  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. ]+d> ;$O  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 5q _n 69b  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated /dwj:g0y  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. A@)ou0[n@  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related jh"YHe/X  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 8XD_p);Oy  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. hFMT@Gy  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye Ah_0o_Di  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population x\5v^$  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: M"5S  
363–71. PE<(eIr  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. /-&2>4I  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Lrq e:\  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. `gz/?q  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. lf}%^od~6  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 4%5 +  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. zj 2l&)N  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. l(d3N4iz  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated tC\(H=ecP  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. H0 -v^H>^  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. i/RA/q  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too F.-:4m(Z  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 0,j!*  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: DeTLh($\  
77–80. {9- n3j}  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice t(p}0}Pp  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? uA~?z :~=  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. [Nu py,v  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest ^CW{`eBwk  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye Z+2 j(  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic qe|U*K 2_  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. i!yE#zew  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading h_15"rd  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. hkx(r5o  
82 McCarty et al. L u1pxL  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Y{9xF8#   
Sons, 1977; 249–73. O3tw@ &k  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 3f(tb%pa5  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International ##nC@h@  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. xc,Wm/[  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 7KN+ @6!x  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. &/(JIWc1su  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 3,1HD_  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased +P<#6<gR  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment {\gpXVrn_  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 3EH7H W  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the FT\%=>{  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health U\-= |gQ'  
Organization, 1997. C(kL=WD   
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, 1v 4M*  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 6N[X:F 3`,  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. ATjE8!gO!  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. eU\XAN#@  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of +*wr=9>  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ijgm-1ECk3  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. r?/!VO-*N  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. f dJ<(i]7W  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated !\!j?z=O8  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. b-RuUfUn0  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. ]q/USVj{  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract (*9-F a  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and c$x >6&&L  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. >4J(\'}m|  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. F>eo.|'  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to 6zI}?KZf  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. <`WcI`IA b  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. }s[`T   
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A 7"1]5\p^g  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule ] !n3j=*   
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. L_o/fTz4  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. z0Z1J8Qq6.  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ij1YV2v  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 28vQ  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 6 [?5hmc"w  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, Hp@Q  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract !t}yoN n|  
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