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 oIQor %z  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes =/V r,y$  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to adHHnH`,  
unoperated cataract in Australia. D@7\Fg  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual D{PO!WzW  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than OB;AgE@  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination ~^KemwogPN  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography {*yhiE,  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who |JnJ=@-y  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater & i)p^AmM  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or \ Lrg:  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. M5[AA/@  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne "e@JMS  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 CdC&y}u  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria RVlC8uJ;P  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract +'y$XR~W{  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had Wd3/Y/MD  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 Q<wrO  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber {CYFM[V  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber $l7 <j_C  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Y{f;qbEQH'  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or +p>tO\mo  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven J XbG|L  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate s{'r'`z.  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery w)5eD+n\-  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% G# .z((Rj  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone u\<z5O  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an #zZQ@+5zw  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision j2k,)MHu!x  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ?R#-gvX%  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural P!0uA kt9C  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance 3tA6r  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated roVG S{4T\  
cataract. /!P,o}l7  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 5)AMl)  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced )xo IH{  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of ^R! qxSj  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes dE%rQE7'  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. S)>L 0^M1  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health Cz#0Gh>1  
services accessibility, prevalence 'W@X139zq  
INTRODUCTION  t ux/@}I  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in @_J~zo  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all +ZQf$@+  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate g~rZ=  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be .-awl1 W  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 5N @k9x  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting @ 4#q  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is Y[R veF  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in $BXZFC_1S  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists |D~mLs;&  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather {^a"T'+  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral "jb`KBH%"  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has V|gW%Z,j  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for PzMJ^H{  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has o^&u?F9  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 >E;kM B  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is WYSqnmi  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the Ti$G2dBO  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract %UT5KYd!=N  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence -K eoq  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors  :tBIo7  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to [% \>FT[  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. wI8  
METHODS I! eu|_cF  
Study population U*(/eEtd-  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual Ne#FBRu5  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 js;p7wi  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to QxS] 6hA  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ndg1E;>  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of q)te/J @  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen P1C{G'cR  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites i<@"+~n~GK  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. |ecK~+  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 J>Pc@,y  
Original Article !iv6k~.e'2  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia ~&HP }Q$#f  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD M^IEu }  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia zUq ^  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, )|3BS`  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au WbJ|]}hJ\  
78 McCarty et al. m.F}9HI%hN  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural `]~1pc  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural n8 UG{. =  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify )7]la/0  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a M>qqe!c*  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of {%wF*?gk  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, H(?)v.%  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of -al\* XDz  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. (aC~0 #4  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local GF GW'}w-  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. K_! R   
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian YCl&}/.pA  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. N\l|3~  
Assessment of cataract lA{JpH_Y8s  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after [KQ#b  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine !;3hN$5  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the s(Y2]X4 (  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 6Y`rQ/F  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and !78P+i  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on _V`F_C\\#  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) |LV}kG(2  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, d\ I6Wn  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, .oS[ DTn5S  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than Mfn^v:Q#  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to 8vkCmV  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual R XN0v@V  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Tnv,$KOhs  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. P b-4$n2c  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to a[VX)w_W{  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the }y1r yeW<  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight D&o ~4Qvc]  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the f AY(ro9Q(  
analyses. LC7%Bfn!  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., h ,\5C/  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in >*/:"!u  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. C{:U<q  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman `>4"i+NFF8  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph $."D OZQ3U  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were Yl&bv#[z  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 0.S7uH%"  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 2:@,~{`#*  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately Kv)Kn8df  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated % *ng *  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies cQ;@z2\  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were eiCmd =O7  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, jM-7  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph T/0cPn0>  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical P2&0bNY  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) OHwH(}H?  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to O2":)zU.  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.  HzL~B#  
Assessment of risk factors ~|[i64V<^  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information 3&I3ViAH  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 TS`m&N{i")  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration *k Tj,&x[  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, +f$ {r7  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension ,k1ns?i9KH  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ^;K"Y'f$  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were +xAD;A4  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to ^F qs,^~W  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants JC`;hY  
and use of vitamin supplements. m7`S@qG  
Data management and statistical analysis ^?_MIS`4N  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a CfO{KiM(2  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, z}iz~WZ  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or tSY4'  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at n^rbc ;}  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms h+7U'+|%A  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and zJh!Q* *  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency nTw:BU4jd  
checks were performed on the entire data set. &> _aY #  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was =jA.INin4  
employed for statistical analyses. :# \jx  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific I?nU+t;  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to H@1q U|4  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five xnJ#}-.7  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates aO}p"-'  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific [vz2< genn  
data were weighted according to the 1996 l: kW|  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the J7`;l6+Gb  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. <IBUl}|\  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared UV</Nx)3  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated *3h_'3yo@  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted Q<DXDvL  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the oLtzPC  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. fGW~xul_  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically "rc QS H  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use .g7\+aiTUd  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The 82V;J 8T?  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment &h.?~Ri  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with EP90E^v^  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence i5_l//]  
limits. I.>8p]X  
RESULTS :c Er{U8  
Study population gxJ12' m  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 |eFaOL|  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) -G#m'W&   
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did |VjD. ]I  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was }[PC Yn S  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as jK% Lewq  
a whole. pB]*cd B?  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to $Y\7E/T  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 2 S4SG\  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to 0QW;=@)d  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 6\v4#  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) (/9erfuJ  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. c+O:n:L  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery  tO D}&  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases ELg$tc  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any :QHh;TIG=<  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). !/! Fc 'A  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three (\wV)c9  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence \C2HeA\#SW  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes /^gu&xnS  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% "`4M4`'  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract H;DjM;be  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract B1%xU ?  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall V@EyU/VJ  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was E}#&2n8Y  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). |@f\[v9`  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ~EvGNnTL  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified xK 5~9StP  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated  9/I xh?  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents =+[` 9  
as information about risk factor exposure was not WD*z..`  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed VCIV*5 P  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence uU-1;m#N?  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic I SdB5Va  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a @~&^1%37)  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use MlW*Tugg  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 8_O?#JYi  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, 1F+JyZK}w  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. glBS|b$\:  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the :o iHf:  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having {K: ] dO  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract ep*8*GmP  
surgery were not available. .*J /F$  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate %J9+`uSl  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had T`]P5Bk8r  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been oR3t vw.  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment i|28:FJA  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant C 5e;U  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression =j{Kxnv  
model. The factors that remained significantly related A8:eA  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever o1-_BlZ  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been ,3!4 D^  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors rD9:4W`^  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate ;krIuk-  
model. I<+:Ho=6  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract HuQdQ*Q  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 6` Aw!&{  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 P'*Fd3B#A=  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort 4Tb"+Y}  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total >5D;uTy u  
(years) (%) (%) (%) ${gO=Z  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) iJCv+p_f  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) o8NRu7@?  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 'u d[#@2  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) QV4F A&f&  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) py'xB i6}v  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) g${k8.TV  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) oArJ%Y>  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) M5L/3qLh1  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) K_!:oe7%  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) R dNL f  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) q>5j (,6F  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) Fh|{ib  
Age-standardized :T<5Tq*+x  
(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) \1QY=}  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 8DM! ]L  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 1+YqdDqQ  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, (L(n%  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). jx2{k K  
Outcomes of cataract surgery [1O{yPV3s  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ,i8%qm8  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were uL^`uI#I  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular G\B+bBz  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular ml /S|`Drk  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact h_SkX@"/-  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 0=K8 nxdx  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected  qI${7  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% PTqia!  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes \O\q1 s~  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, ga(k2Q;y  
P = 0.027). K<kl2#  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity S4'<kF0z  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without tw&v@HUP  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract "?<h,Hvi  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, P,9Pn)M|  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the RB BmGZ  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 -4zV yW S<  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this To5hVL<Ex"  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four 1j:aGj>{  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these }lT;?|n:h  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 7D4tuXUq2  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one :2&"ak>N  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract c?u*,d) G  
surgery. YRFz ]  
DISCUSSION ZfK[o{9>  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically ,?k1if(0[  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract {]Hv*{ ]  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes OZnKJ<  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual &i.sSqSI5  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 7CvBE;i  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is B4wRwrVI>  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, I[d<SHo  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract TlRc8r|  
services throughout Australia. > pP&/  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age ,"XiI$Le  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ?%}!_F`h%  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous lg~7[=%k#  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye Zd-6_,r  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract >3Q|k{97  
between studies because of different methodologies and RZ xwr  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well %S}uCqcAK  
as the different age structures of the study populations.  1/2cb-V  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 9;?u%  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. }Mt1C~{(  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity mpMAhm:  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. `+"(GaZ  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the G+t:]\  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 2_+>a"8Y  
80 McCarty et al. hN &?x5aC>  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort O9(z"c  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total 4^F%bXJ)  
(years) (%) (%) (%) t'l4$}(  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) J-5>+E,nZ  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 0)332}Oh  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) [eDrjf3m  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) .4)oZ  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 7|DG1p9C  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) cR/Nl pX  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) %+N]$Q  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) >|E]??v  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) |Ev|A9J!  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 3SP";3 +  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) m-vn5OX  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) Mh.1KI[t  
Age-standardized ERpAV-Zf  
(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) L7-BuW}&  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 6]?mjG6  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. ]P0%S@]  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 :o>=^N  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the lFjz*g2'  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude s5nw<V9$]  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the Hd|[>4Z  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ub-3/T  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains hG?y)g\A  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban t0m;tb bg  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than "GO!^ZG]  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 4v\HaOk  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in gjDNl/r/  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, S hI1f  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens PR %)3  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. i1vz{Tc  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable V*j l  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, &n6{wtBP  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that  J=` 8  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Lv%3 jj  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is .G{cx=;  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted W{F)YyR{.  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement IVNH.g'  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We |OH*c3~r  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction u# 76w74  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have wQ+pVu?6_  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this k&$ov  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their ip-X r| Bq  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants Nny*C`uDF  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the MB)<@.A0  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ?Q"andf  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 1Wpu  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to Fv^zSoi2  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change q} e#L6cM  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function 2;v:Z^&  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in "\o#YC  
overall quality of life.22 sX1DbEjj[o  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually vbid>$%  
significant posterior capsule opacification following l U/Xi  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% cGV%=N^BE<  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated p1UloG\  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear j\ y!  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an /8l-@P. o  
opaque capsule. F$t]JM  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and @[r[l#4yUi  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, T?1BcY  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We |S8$NI2  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more hz:7W8  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is B?j t?  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 Y<T0yl?  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 'yiv.<4  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of s@Q7F{z  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care 1 uU$V =  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without m,HE4`g   
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the s{^B98d+W  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated _HwA%=>7  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. Tt: (l/1  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem r?DCR\Jq  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract og";mC  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will `rn/H;r!Z  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the =`+D/ W\[Y  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in cW*v))@2  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well fqI67E$59  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes QT c{7&  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. X.<3 /  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract qm=U<'b^  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for *O[/KR%  
cataract extractions increases. UNDl&C2vz  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS znrO~OK  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 1hw.gn*JK>  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the C_J@:HlJ  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell T`e`nQ0nn  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and CU|E-XPW  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient f&CQn.K"  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal ec ;  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. I0x)d`  
REFERENCES 1 *' /B  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. }-fHS;/  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. [)V~U?  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ]$ d ;P  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population qy'-'UlIr  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. vb^fx$V  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens s~{rC{9X  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated {m*lt3 $k  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ?7fqWlB  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related :!_l@=l  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. f" Iui  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. 1 3 ]e< '  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye }W^@mi  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population z-MQGq xR  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 7G+!9^  
363–71. Tz )Ku  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. <%YW/k"o  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye /k/X[/WO  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. C<=rnIf'  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. m]V#fRC  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient IM1&g7Qs2  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ]){ZL  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. I8! .n  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated gM&O dT+i  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. c1E{J <pZ  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. ?;oJ=.T  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too y7/4u-_c  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 4L,wBce;,t  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: )Wle CS_  
77–80. VHPqEaR  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice q6pHL  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ' ds2\gN  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 3ibQbk  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest : j kO  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye vLxaZWr  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic l@&-be  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. {J)%6eL?  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading $VQ;y|K+[  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. a& 0g0n6  
82 McCarty et al. H ~3.F  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & EC5 = 2w<  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. A{4,ih"5  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume SW %}S*h  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International k={1zl ;  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. @p~scE.#\  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and Wu* 4r0  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. m#_ Rv  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison .`~?w+ ~  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased Odwf7>  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment [-[59 H[6)  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. @;Jv/N6@  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the |hj!NhBe  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health @:RoYvk$  
Organization, 1997. ECi;o1hda  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, { i6L/U.  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation B-_b.4ND)  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. M.,DXEZT  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. s}". po]  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of l0^cdl-  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative -a@e28Y  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. n= 4  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. xi{ r-D8Z  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated q++\< \2  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. O'IU1sU  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. L!*+: L DL  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract ?2#'>B  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and &~+QPnI>Pm  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. VQqBo~  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. ssLswb  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to U!-Nx9  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. iii|;v ]+  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. X-nC2[tu'W  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A o/7u7BQl2  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule v.<mrI#?  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. L~t< 0\r  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. ,k~' S~w.  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 0D2I)E72o  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ,.0b E 9\o  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 9\hI:rI  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, F<b'{qf"  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract LWJ ?p-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:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交