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 ~V|!\CB  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes .N+xpxdG,  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to ~fUSmc  
unoperated cataract in Australia. T i/iD2g  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual RU >vnDaC  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than jN<]yhqf  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 6aK --k  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography h1gb&?w5P  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who SmLYxH3F  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater i-=ff  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or &Egn`QU  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. 1!C,pXU#:  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne <Ztda !  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 7r<>^j'  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ;VH]TKkk  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract &e)p6Egl  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had w +Z};C  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 2r0!h98  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 6K y;1$  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 3d<HIG^W}  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 4a|Fx  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or yfW^wyDd2o  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven *;d)'7<  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate Z4-dF;7  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery F)5Aq H/p  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% #G=QL(f>/  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone 4<K`yU]"  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an =4 H K  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision eM"mP&TTL  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no L _y|l5  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural j*`!o/=LI  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance N6[^62  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ~?5m5z O  
cataract. &FVlTo1  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is q$rA-`jw  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 5O W(] y|  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of d@4!^vD;  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes TkoXzG8yE<  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. jFT V\|C  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health kw:D~E (  
services accessibility, prevalence 8m6nw0   
INTRODUCTION y(  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 3a}`xCO5  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 5 hadA>d  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate :fVMM7  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be p-r%MnT  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 SvP\JQ<c  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting ,HkhKbQ  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 1 " 7#|=1/  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in F'$S!K58  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists vW-`=30  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather )$h9Y   
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral M6*{#Y?  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ~y H>Ko9F}  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for H!.D2J   
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has <4e*3WSG  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 )c >B23D  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is G0 /vn9&  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the c_bVF 'Bz  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract mhLRi\[c )  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence 2 C]la  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors jJ"EGFa8  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to "SU-^z  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. m?VRX .>  
METHODS _=*tDa  
Study population :-\ yy  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual 42>m,fb2[  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 }t 51U0b%  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to < VaMUm<2  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. {rvbo1t  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of !UMo4}Y  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen \ FoxKOTp  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites ^~6]0$yJ  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. sjzXJ`s  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 X s>s|_T  
Original Article ~kYqGH  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia rFq@ ]t3q  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD SE^b0ZV*x  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .^LL9{?  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, @v ~ Pwr!  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au PyMVTP4  
78 McCarty et al. ]`@]<6  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural O5^J!(.O\Z  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural wt}%2x} x  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify nQ642i%RQ  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a o'eI(@{F=  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of $Pd|6  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, bR'mV-2'  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of afY_9g!\  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. |}M0,AS  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local ;vJ\]T ml  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. Q=(@K4  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian -SvTg{Q{la  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. "]T$\PJun  
Assessment of cataract pgLtD};S  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after lMC{SfdH  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine [0&'cu>  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the X&(<G  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using +}^|dkc  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and Vd+td;9(  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on #bT8QbJ(  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) >Mvka;T]  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, *u>lx!g  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, -<qxO  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 1 -ZJT  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ]~-*hOcQ4  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual &{%MjKJ._  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, VF)uu[ f9  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. -2F@~m|  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to KRY cCn  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the AR%hf  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight @}<"N  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ~>V-*NT8  
analyses. VFv9Q2/.  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., N.Dhu~V  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in w |_GV}#_  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. v:KX9A.  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman H@{Objh 1  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph h#i\iK&A  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were b"``D ?  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera x97L6!  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 z3a-+NjDm  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately -hWC_X:9jP  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated TyF{tuF  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies <I; 5wv  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were GnFs63  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, XS?gn.o\  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph z}ElpT[(;  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical P;vxT}1  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) I&Jt> O4  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to jd 1jG2=f  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. q-nER<  
Assessment of risk factors B**Nn!}0  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information %,\=s.~1  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 vJ"i.:Gf4  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration 5t\HJ`C1Z  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, dAc ?O-~  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension NjX[;e-u  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and h}Rx_d  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were cWMUj K/N  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 9sSN<7  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants ~`qEWvPn  
and use of vitamin supplements. wN97_Y=`n  
Data management and statistical analysis bFY~oa%C  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a xCXQ<77  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, d(-EcY>?  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or :@eHX&  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at .@#A|fgv  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 8w_7O> 9  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and =wVJ%  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency h|D 0z_f  
checks were performed on the entire data set. VwyVEZt  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was SmhGZ   
employed for statistical analyses. _,haD)1g~  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 3BG>Y(v  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to lk3=4|?zsE  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five tyh@ ^7  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates v+G=E2Lhv  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific YJ_\Ns+Ow  
data were weighted according to the 1996 j8Cho5C  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the =Yz'D|=t  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. Q>Qibr  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared [sF(#Y:I  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated l +*&:Q/  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted GZip\S4Y  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the *.#oxcll  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. *=AqM14 @  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically q_kdCO{:df  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use s{0aBeq  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The m3bCZ 9iE  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment !-<p,z  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with 4_A0rveP  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence iOAbaPN  
limits. T*g:# ^4  
RESULTS a 2 IgC25  
Study population ':{>a28=  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 21hv%CF\9  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) )R`xR,H  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did ApBWuXp|u  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was #$1Z  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as `F<jLU^3  
a whole. (T`E!A0I\?  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to f+8wl!M+6  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 8>hwK)av  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to IxLhU45  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural _XCOSomL`  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) hxQqa 0B  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. nRyU]=-X  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery &f-Uyr7?  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases _ODbY;M  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any lXcx@#~  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). Ym3\pRFiD  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three KQB3 m"  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence *98$dQR$  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes phM>.y_  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% 5[c^TJ3  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract ty8v 6J#  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract |yx6X{$k  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall FCnm1x#   
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was On?p 9^9  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). z11O F  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract \otWd  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified e)(wss+d7P  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 4O35 "1  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents v%q0OX>9X"  
as information about risk factor exposure was not c@893<_  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed "1%5,  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence >r !|sC  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic "'t0h{W r8  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 9b9$GyI  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use b:TLV`>/&  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private ~^1{B\I  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, Fvbh\m ~  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. FY#C.mL  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the ?vbvBu{a  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having ~XO Ts  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract ]GW]dM  
surgery were not available. ui/a|Q  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate y ~U #veY  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had oU.R2\ Q  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been 4bYK}o S  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment KV0]m^@x  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant @U& QI*  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 62ws/8d6f  
model. The factors that remained significantly related hvsWs.;L'  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever RwpdRBb  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been ,)Znb=  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors HMh"}I2n  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate o<pf#tifv  
model. Bf~vA4  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract e#$]Y?,  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with LnH?dy  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 s@K4u^$A  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort \o*5  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total  KY$)#i  
(years) (%) (%) (%) i:Y^{\Z?V  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) QI'Oz{vE  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) [+n*~  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) A$Hfr8w1u  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) k@RDvn  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) FWrX3i  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) !Qu"BF   
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) -#u=\8  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) 'YmIKIw  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 6t[+pL\b  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) R O+GK`J  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) tkeoNuAM  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 2_HNhW  
Age-standardized 6-N?mSQU  
(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) {FeDvhv  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 e^6)Zz1\  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% >JHryS.j$4  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, +h|`/ &,  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). ^ Edfv5  
Outcomes of cataract surgery DR5\45v  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior yj 3cyLXw  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were 3`t#UY).F  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular PxWT1 !  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular Ra) 3+M!x  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact !![DJ   
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of H%qsjB^  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected RIWxs Zt  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% ^S4d:-.3  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ` 06;   
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, jFQQ`O V  
P = 0.027). jwc)Lj}  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity [%"|G9  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without CpUk Cgg  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 8g@<d ^8@  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, b z`+k,*  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the y`Wty@  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 27eooY1  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this .0zY}`  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four ity & v 9  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these vv72x]  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction l5S aT,%  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one @6Y?\Wx$w  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract QyEn pZ8?a  
surgery. z Xg3[orF  
DISCUSSION zU5v /'h>d  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 29;?I3< *  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract q$0*b]=E  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes O*hDbM2QQw  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual NH[kNi'  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 1T"`v tR  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is }s7$7  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, UFXaEl}R   
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract A!od9W6  
services throughout Australia. /Wi[OT14  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age a!zz6/q[  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 9 &$y }Y  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 4Gk WRu1  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye JB%',J  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract . .IfP@  
between studies because of different methodologies and Q 1U\D  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well aZH:#lUlj  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 1auIR/=-  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of j b!x:  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. $jjfC  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity BGvre'67  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. qEyyT[:  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the g?c xp +  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. |J1$= s  
80 McCarty et al. 5[8xV%>;  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 6gL #C&  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total *^\Ef4Lh  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 6]&OrS[  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) x!?u^  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( wx ]0p  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) uFX#`^r`  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) l3{-z4mw  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) KWq+PeB5TS  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) Giid~e33  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) N+9VYH"*  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) zUt' QH7E.  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) mu\6z_e  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 7!e vm;A  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ADz ^\  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) >,v`EI g  
Age-standardized |O{m2Fi  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) %p Ynnfr  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ,bZL C  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. ]>W6 bTK  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 FDv<\2+ c  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the GiJ *Wp  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude -m\u  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the v>6"j1Z  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ^dI424  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ;/bewivNJ  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban bc7/V#W  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than S~<$H y*kh  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 99]R$eT8  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in 0^v`T%|fTX  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, AKY1o.>z  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens #"} JdBn  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. `b?R#:G  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable W1WYej"  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 2kqup)82e  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that u6J8"< -W  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and #./fY;:cj  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is w3N[9w?1  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted %3s1z<;R[S  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement #`~C)=-  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We QfmJn((  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction S};#+ufgTt  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have &`h{i K7  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this \h +AXs<j  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Upx G@b  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants E!;SL|lj.  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the G %BjhpL  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ -6Z\qxKqZ  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their -7SAK1c$  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to __uA}f Zp  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change  Ii6<b6-  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function ]{!U@b  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ag;Q F  
overall quality of life.22 2{D{sa  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually u\a#{G;Z  
significant posterior capsule opacification following '-QwssE  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 9y6-/H ,  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated ih)zG  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear oVnvO iAc  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an -N6f1>}pE  
opaque capsule. }q`ts=dlGt  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and Y1L[;)Hn  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 2uz W+D6J  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 8Pfb~&X^Ws  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Q}`0W[a ~  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is s kv GU(G}  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 2$9odD<r  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any ZLc -RM  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of gK_Ymq5>"M  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care C7XxFh  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without Ut*`:]la  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the vhe>)h*B  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 2^Eg9y'  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 1!ii;s^e  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem z[LNf.)}  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract XQ#;Zs/l  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will !-ok"k0,u  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the t;\kR4P  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 2X.r%&!1M  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well nx@=>E+a  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes r/4``shg  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. wZG\>9~  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ccNd'2P  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for _?<|{O  
cataract extractions increases. ^.1)};i  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS u0 P|0\  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 7[w,:9& }  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the RdWRWxTn8+  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell N< |@y mi  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and O|\J}rm'  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient dUsYZdQs  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal +lm{Olm'^  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. C+'/>=>a.  
REFERENCES LyZ.l*h%=m  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. ,3?Q(=j  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. $RYa6"`  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ^]7}YF2|  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population *$yR*}A  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. M}d_I+  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens AB=daie  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated _XG/Pp)  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. y6LWx:  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related M*!agh  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Xp >7 iX!:  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. sA/pVU  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye |*:'TKzNS  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population @$lG@I,[  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: UADFnwR[R  
363–71. m4aB*6<lq  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. 1HXjN~XF  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ozAS[B6  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. hHN'w73z  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. -j%, Oo  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ^=T$&gD  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. xGu r  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. +,2:g}5  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ugo.@   
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. aEM%R<e  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. _(Sa4Vb=Q6  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too K&nE_.kbl  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal _jJPbKz  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 74H)|Dkx  
77–80. 9S-Z& 2L  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice |o{:ZmzM  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? OZx W?wnd  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. <\Eh1[F  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest ERpnuM b  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye T.@aep\"  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic &=#[(vl  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. i 7_ _  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading ~Q?a|mV,  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. *RXbc~ H  
82 McCarty et al. qR(\5}  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & e?opkq\f  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Q7R~{5r>W  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume  TR<<+  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International 9A} # 6  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 6b+b/>G0  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and O J/,pLYu  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. )#.<]&P}  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison X=hYB}}nu  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased <z]cyXv/  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment ANJ$'3tg  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. C!Rs^/  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the kBYNf =  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ROk5]b.  
Organization, 1997. NbC@z9Q  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, P^w#S  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation T-5nB>)  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. r.#t63Rb  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. "NgxkbDEbG  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 4d8B`Fa9  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative VwOW=4`6  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. O+?<h{"  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. :lB=L r)  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated fcNL$U&-,i  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. o'W5|Gy  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. blTo5NLX  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract r :F  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and CAcS~ "  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. JMH8MH*  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. -PS#Z0>  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to %n hm  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. n@ U n  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. q|Qk2M  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A N 5i+3&  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule ?Rj~f{%g  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. }; f#^gz'  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Xtp"QY p  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health #B:hPZM1  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 4\6N~P86  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in J2j U4mR  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, (;q\}u  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract d1U\ft:gV  
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:
freekaobo官方微信订阅号 正确答案:考博
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交