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 5?8jj  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes =*KY)X  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 8j}o\!H  
unoperated cataract in Australia. =L*-2cE6#  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual M C%!>,tC  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than K?*p|&Fi?8  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination h=dFSK?*D  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography 8@7leAq!  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who \Yr&vX/[p  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ex8}./mjJ  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or S+GW}?!  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. lFa?l\jLXZ  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne nf,Ez  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 Ys8D|HIk  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria G' mg-{  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract Fz2C XC  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had ICzcV };$  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 IgPU^?sp  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 7E;`1lh7  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Q; BD|95nl  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 9b)'vr*Hy7  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or W$:D#;jz`h  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven UoHNKB73  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate lKV7IoJ&;  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery '}E"M db  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% `bW0Va N  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone BQ(sjJ$v6F  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an [#+klP$  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision +{WZpP},v  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no :.SwO<j  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 6NGQU%Hd  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance 1HUe8m[#3  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated L\\'n )  
cataract. CQ'4 ".7  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 9eEA80i7  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced jV(b?r)eT{  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of q m"AatA  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes M7//*Q'?  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. j4$NQ]e^4  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health 7e6; |?  
services accessibility, prevalence 0">9n9  
INTRODUCTION ,{BF`5bn|  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in As(6E}{S  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all }a!c  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate {r:5\  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be O@-(fyG  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 oFp4* <\  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting ~2O1$ou  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 'v%v*Ujf[  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in <UbLds{+Uo  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists -8z@FLUK-  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather \8/$ZEom  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral `$ZBIe/u  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has %h& F  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for L^??*XEUJ  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has j9*5Kj  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 y@Ak_]{b  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is w %R=kY)o  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the iV.j!H7o  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract :F pt>g  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence +]0/:\(B  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors InB'Ag"  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to B=|m._OL]n  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. = o_zsDv  
METHODS YkI_i(  
Study population %B04|Q  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual  zj7?2  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 \  6 : 7  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to G>S3?jGk  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. PbY=?>0z  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 1_5]3+r_U-  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen Wrs6t  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites mZ#h p}\.  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. {hBnEj^@  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 W|V 9:A  
Original Article qw }. QwPT  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia k;!}nQ&  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD >JT^[i8[  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia <Eh_  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, #oxP,LR  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au `W'S'?$  
78 McCarty et al. KfV& 7yi  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural tJ Mm  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural -E-e!  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify iKAqM{(  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a PQ(/1v   
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of </23* n]  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, ~A,(D-  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of YAYwrKt  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. =$WDB=i  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local *a@78&N  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. & hv@ &  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian BD&AtOj[,  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. X{;5jnpG  
Assessment of cataract /|,:'W%U  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after Jp +h''t  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine # &Z1d(!  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the %DuSco"  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using gutf[Ksu  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and Wo<kKkx2  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on '2v$xOh!y  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) h#]LXs  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, 2>Sr04Pt  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, mZ4I}_\,  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than oL*ZfF3  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to tz_WxOQ0  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual f^ 6da6Z  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, !l~3K(&4  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. bVYsPS  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to bXK$H=S Bz  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the A&=`?4>  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight w"A%@<V3Ec  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the H?)?(t7@  
analyses. o]m56  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., mY/x|)MmM  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in FHbw &  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. mKhlYV n  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman P>;uS  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph Xsv^GmP+  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were c`4 i#R  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera R#33AC CX  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 s+E-M=d0e  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately \_PD@A9  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated i V8O<en&i  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies pPt w(5bH  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were J-+p]xG  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, p/.[ cH  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph ro*$OLc/  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical 5sK1rDN  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) (S#nA:E  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to </7_T<He.  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. ?&GV~DYxA  
Assessment of risk factors T^n0=|  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information ;c~%:|  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 GJIM^  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration jbK<"T5  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, e x`mu E  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension > ;zQ.2*  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ~q05xy8  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were mYiIwm1cb(  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to ,zU7UL^I  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants !$| h[ct  
and use of vitamin supplements. b^I(>l-  
Data management and statistical analysis dqo&3^px  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a Th[Gu8b3  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, Ci?A4q$.  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or zM*PN|/%sH  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at [_SV$Jz  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms ww(.   
were entered into a computer with double data entry and L:3  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency a}#Jcy!e  
checks were performed on the entire data set. KOM]7%ys1H  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was js<}>wD7<  
employed for statistical analyses. %~A$cc  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific <.qhW^>X  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to Gv uX"J  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five z3X:.%  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates ~\~K ,v  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific x%\m/_5w%  
data were weighted according to the 1996 :VEy\ R>W  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the `zZGL&9m`  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. ELWm>'Q#9  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ^w*$qz ESy  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated uk)6%  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted | N/Wu9w$  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the e}Xmb$  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. f/Q7WXl0  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 3S_H hvB  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use OY>0qj  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The UPI'O %  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment }*ZOD1j  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with y$n`+%_  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence W7ffdODb  
limits. }1 /`<m  
RESULTS ~ [4oA$[a|  
Study population  "uthFE  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 #g6*s+Gm  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) ~dO&e=6Hk  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did u3>D vl@  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was a#qC.,$A  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as DE^@b+6  
a whole. &xGcxFd  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to D`G ;kp  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The uWSfr(loX  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to WF.y"{6>  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural =h{j F7  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) @4Ox$M  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. l]GUQcN=  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery Rf~? u)h1  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases <CJ`A5N  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ?_+h+{/@B  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). aNW!Y':*  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three MJ )aY2  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence jnl3P[uQ  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes |Ir&C[QS{y  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% kdX ]Afyj  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract *k]izWsV*  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract V_SZp8  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall v$H]=y  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was X R =^zp?  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). tw`{\kWG  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract BtZycI  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified +])St3h  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated $ +`   
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents )i;o\UU  
as information about risk factor exposure was not `qjiC>9  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed FE`:1  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence <]u~;e57  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 5jpb`Axj#  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a (mOUbO8  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use q x1}e  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private aK%i=6j!  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, p.gaw16}>  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. 483BrFV  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the em87`Hj^lo  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having oM=Ltxv}  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract k0=$mmmPY  
surgery were not available. )1>fQ9   
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate S}=euY'i  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had BCE} Er&  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been PF,|Wzx  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment .}}w@NO  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant o*OaYF'8  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression l3sL!D1u  
model. The factors that remained significantly related  $)5F3 a|  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever z;dD }Fo  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been g,5r)FU`  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors u0;FQr2  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate k+au42:r  
model. A~CQ@  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract !+?,y/*5(  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with ,&II4;F  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 +gG6(7&+=  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort K<HF!YU#I2  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Nw`}iR0i  
(years) (%) (%) (%) N798("  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) SBBDlr^P  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) {iG k~qN  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) Fd:A^]  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) O.n pi: a  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) Rc2|o.'y  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) DwXzmp[qWH  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) @za X\  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)  rBv  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 5*=a*nD11  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) K)|#FRPM u  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) nRpZ;X)'.  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) LQ5W S  
Age-standardized hjB G`S#  
(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) ;dt&* ]wA  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 l4oI5)w  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% s 2t'jIB  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, P 0xInW F  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). 4qtjP8Zv[  
Outcomes of cataract surgery &j}\ZD  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior w (kN0HD  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were yM%,*VZ  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 38IVSK_  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular [gZd$9a  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact -(FVTWi0  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of =/@c9QaV B  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected ,bRvj8"M  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% k;v2 3  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes FHVZ/ e  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, o/E A%q1  
P = 0.027). Yr@)W~  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 7bioLE  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without %\?2W8Qv_J  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract [xT2c.2__J  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, mjbr}9  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the V.Pb AN  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 $a(EF 6  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this '`^<*;w  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four YC\~P VG  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these -:(,<Jt<  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction x0wy3+GZc  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one gCAWRNp  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract o >bf7+D  
surgery. }?xu/C  
DISCUSSION 6P;JF%{J  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically HaI  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract &Mbpv)V8  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ETe,RY  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual QSf{V(fs  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and /)?]vKMiI  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is O G#By6O  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, zRsG $)B  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ?g2Wu0<  
services throughout Australia. FCU~*c8Cs  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age }./__gJ  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is S!o!NSn@1  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous ;cIs$  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye bJ~]nj 3  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract -%"Kxe  
between studies because of different methodologies and gTZ1LJ  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well U}(*}Ut  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 1Iu^+  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of ?cf9q@eAH  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. <e|I?zI9-  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity O#fGHI<43[  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. =xFw4 D9  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the `yJpDGh  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. <m"Zk k  
80 McCarty et al. "<x%kD  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort I:[^><?E  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total HkFoyy  
(years) (%) (%) (%) DQY*0\  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) Jw?J(ig^  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( %JmSCjt`G  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) %{g<{\@4(;  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 7 7"'?  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) {j.5!Nj]B  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) LC) -aw>-  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) _v:t$k#sN  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) \&|)?'8rS  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) DYkNP: +  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 0q(}nv  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) XqMJe'%r  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) sA=WU(4^  
Age-standardized #Q}`kFB`  
(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) .^0@^%Wi  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract { [ QCuR  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. &u0JzK  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Z}6   
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the :4|ubu  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude S,,,D+4  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the xG i,\K\:  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). +x$GwX  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains "HSAwe`5jU  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban eSNi6RvE  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than zX{K\yp  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 9B gR@b  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ~Qjf-|  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, $6Z@0H@X  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens S?n,O+q  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. r kOLTi[$  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable g9~>mJR  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, V*HkF T  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that KLi&T mIB  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and #)hc^gIO&<  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is j t9fcw  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted * 0M[lR0t  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement ;s m )f  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We , kiyx h^  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction _)A X/%^%  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have ;#a^M*e  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this [k qx%4q)  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their _?Q0yVH;,  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants I29aja  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the l!z)gto  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ft$@':F  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their oNW5/W2e;  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to #w_cos[I  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 36ygI0V_  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function oT9 dMhx8  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in aPD4S&"Q  
overall quality of life.22 OEMYS I%  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually wB%:RI,  
significant posterior capsule opacification following PtP{_9%Dz  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% NF9fPAF%;  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated /Z':wu\  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear `x b\)  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an fGK=lT$  
opaque capsule. T["(wPrt  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and }.+{M.[}  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, fjD/<`}v  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We Ph{7S43  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more ."HDUo2D7  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is *2nQZ^c.  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 .K I6<k/  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any ~8fy qE$  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of e+'PRVc  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care d2cslD d  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without F@4TD]E0^  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the (T&rvE  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated R ;XG2  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ~f:y^`+Q[  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem i -kj6N5  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract NOzAk%s3I  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will h mijp1u  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the hU: 9zLe  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in {DP%=4  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 397IbZ\  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 6R`q{}.  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. S9cAw5E(yN  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract bQTkW<7gh  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for Vn7FbaO^  
cataract extractions increases. Y.7iKMp(  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS sN"JVJXi  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 9i^dQV.U=  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the B z7rf^H`Z  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell zYCS K~-GW  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and !@.9>"FU  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient U3oMY{{E J  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal By&ibN),  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. c3L)!]kB  
REFERENCES -g5o+RT@  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. jPDk~|  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. Z?@oe-mz  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ktEdbALK  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population [?Q U'[  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. NKyKsu  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens l- mt{2  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ,NA _pvH)  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ~uUN\qx52  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related XCP/e p  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ^!F Li7X  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. $sfDtnRy  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye '0jjoZ:  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population u]<_6;_  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ?as1^~  
363–71. zP`&X:8  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. flXDGoW  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye l5/!0]/  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 5ltrr(MeD  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ^+MG"|)u~  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient S=^kR [O"  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. "<=HmE-;  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. l |Y?]LNr  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated !5VT[w 1  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. u$MXO].Q  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. `^G?+p2E  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too NGs@z^&V  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal p_:bt7 B  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: ;) (F4  
77–80. 1${rQ9FIF  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice = ;z42oS  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? Pe`eF(J  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. Xf/qUao  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest tXg>R _\C  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye y7@q]~%  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic lWRRB&8  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. NN"!kuM  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading g?1! /+  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. ?rSm6V  
82 McCarty et al. D6NgdE7b  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & hTS?+l  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. .% {4B,d$  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume Og E<bw  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International YCI- p p  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. `F,*NESv  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and +)U>mm,  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. '^ob3N/Y [  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison r zO5 3\  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased W*jwf@ 0  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment 2)^gd  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. ]`H8r y2  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the cwC-)#R']  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health  WgayH  
Organization, 1997. Nt/#Qu2#br  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, >og- jz  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 0sGAC  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. [" } Yp  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. k r{eC/Q"  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of m)oGeD( !  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative p)y'a+|7  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. %D $+Z(  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. m |%ly  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ZMn~QU_5  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 1_V',0|`>  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. QsC6\Gt#  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract Y2 QX9RN  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 5FQtlB9F  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. vd]75  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. BE LxaV,  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to ~uRL+<.c  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. S3F8Chk5  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. lq*{2M{[  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A CF0i72ul5  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule *@SZ0   
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. V+- ]txu|  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. *Iir/6myM  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health dSq3V#Q  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 8sz| 9~  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in f zsD  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, %FSY}65  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract 2uy<wJE >  
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