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: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT /;X+<Wj  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes NiSybyR$  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to tqFE>ojlI  
unoperated cataract in Australia. l!*!)qCB(S  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual q/h , jM  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than oHPh 2b0  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination 7~qyz]KkE  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography jmBsPSGIC  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who LOEiV  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater Ln$= 8x^T  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or wBl o2WY  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. @@z5v bs'{  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne NX&Z=ObHu}  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 <{cf'"O7)  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria l+#uQo6cqQ  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract ^2`*1el  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 8\S$iGd  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 @:/H)F^x  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber #G]g  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber or`D-x)+@  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated >aAsUL5W  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or bMB@${i}  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven `PtfPt<{  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate cS%;JV>C  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery xz-?sD/xe  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% g!;a5p6  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone /[I#3|  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an fp?/Dg"49.  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision #'5{ ?Cb  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no &3|l4R\  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural J|u_45<  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance Q"QZ^!zRl  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated :{ Lihe~\  
cataract. {Fvl7Sh  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is fwi -   
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced $"g'C8  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of :pLaxWus!  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes C$d b) 5-  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. WJ/X`?k  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health [$@EQ]tt/  
services accessibility, prevalence m U= 3w  
INTRODUCTION N_E)f  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in '>GPk5Nq77  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all QsBC[7<jd-  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate 3F$N@K~s  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ^;[^L=}8$  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 (gUVZeVFP  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting M63t4; 0A  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is kBtzJ#j B  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 4'y@ne}g!  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 7w}]9wCN?  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather A#gy[.Bb  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral !1#=j;N`  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has |=[. _VH1  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for 2L S91  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has e 3TKg  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ,L; y>::1  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is or(P?Ro  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the VDlP,Mm*  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract |`d-;pk!%  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence \)cbg#v  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors @DKph!c r  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to F#z1 sl'  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. [j?<&^SW  
METHODS A27!I+M  
Study population C|RC9b  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual S~B{G T\M  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 Ki(0s  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to e!w#{</8Q  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. >fp_$bjd  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of JykNEMB#  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen b<BkI""b  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites  dK]#..  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. N~DO_^  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 |5*:Th C[  
Original Article :MGIp%3  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 0+k=gO  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD k;HI-v  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 1n#{c5T  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, rfOrh^  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ew,g'$drD  
78 McCarty et al. nbBox,zW  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural +u3vKzD  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural }BiA@n,  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify c1 1?Kq  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a F ZN}T{<  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of Hqb-)8 ~  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, uP1]EA  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of -IL' (vx  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. la{o<||Aq  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local g?>   
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. X Zxzw*Y1J  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian >"D0vj  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 2l+t-  
Assessment of cataract #ihHAiy3  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after -9(nsaV  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine D`PA@t  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 9iGp0_J  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using /%P,y+<}iG  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and %D[6;PT  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on  bRx}ih  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) CMYk xU  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, |k)Nf+(}W  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, }Q_ }c9?  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than ZV`o: Gd  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to }1YQ?:@  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual JjHQn=3AJ  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Edl .R}&1  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. &DWSu`z  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to <2fvEW/#v  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the yu=(m~KX   
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight 86~q pN  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the g #[,4o;  
analyses. h5@JS1cY  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., Wq*W+7=.  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in /Xw wB  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. Ai5D[ykX  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman J\\o# -H  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph VRz9;=m  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were {_X&{dZLX  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera >~\CiV4^  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 =kn-F T  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately jR{Rd}QtQ  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated N"2P]Z r  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies (?~* .g!  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were xu* dPG)v  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, k_7agW  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph <84d Vg  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical {&.?u1C.\  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) w-?Cg8bq<  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to + zSdP2s  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. Mt+gg F.  
Assessment of risk factors #[NNb?`F  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information W&Kjh|[1QZ  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 C/A~r  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration JbEQ35r  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, '@eH)wh@m)  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension k^r-~q+NV#  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and nAW`G'V#  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were a1# 'uS9W  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to $7bux 1L  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants pt- 1>Ui  
and use of vitamin supplements. %%f(R7n  
Data management and statistical analysis ,{u'7p  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a t'L#8MJ  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, xzTF| Z\  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or nV&v@g4Tt  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at TeWpdUCO  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms #gY|T|  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and lF.y Q  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency mY,t]#^m7  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ?tFsSU  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was HrS  
employed for statistical analyses. (w{C*iB  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 1rQKHC:|  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 4m3pF0k  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five $yg=tWk  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates %H'*7u2  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific cWNWgdk,`V  
data were weighted according to the 1996 bjYaJtn  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the t`y*oRy  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. <tp #KZE  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared J{bNx8.&  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated W^AY:#eX~Q  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted Kk_h&by?  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the t?:Q  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. #8[iqvE  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically /l@h[}g+d-  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use Y94/tjt  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The K:g:GEDgf  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment 8x9$6HO  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with e=%6\&q  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence I_h{n{,sr  
limits. XU19+mW=P  
RESULTS ^#A[cY2eM  
Study population R1=ir# U|D  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 M?fRiOj  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) ?dcR!-3  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did bhb*,iWA  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was j |tu|Q  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as bG6<=^  
a whole. MlM2(/ok  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 4fCg{  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 2!4.L&Ki  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to KZxA\,Y'5  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural r 7mg>3  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) &PAgab2$  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 1xkU;no  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery U8 b1 sz  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases %$l^C!qcY  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any X}5aE4K/  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). XI*_ti  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three s;0eD5b>x  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence Q:x:k+O-  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes &z\]A,=T c  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% dLSnhZ  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract DJ9;{,gm  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 0KF)+`CC>  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall <}E^r_NvD  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was WR *|kh  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). Rro{A+[,X  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract &E{5k{Y  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified hao0_9q+  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 4nhe *ip  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents LaE;{jY  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 1 ]@}+H  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed c#G]3vTdE  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence 3_atv'I  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic kC R)k=*  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 6bg+U`&g  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use eh'mSf^=p  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 7F-b/AdVq  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, %f;(  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ISr~JQr  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the s\&_Kbw] c  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 71tMX[x  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract  &1Fcwj  
surgery were not available. L\og`L)5\  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate 4C /8hsn  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ` OQ&u  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been x#0C+cU  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 0iX qAa  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant V8Q#%#)FHe  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression n@L!{zY  
model. The factors that remained significantly related \|>eG u  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever /^[)JbgB  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been 3r em"M  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors YY!(/<VI  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate %Y Rg1UKY  
model. lO $M6l  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract J-PzIFWd  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with iL 4SL}P  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 0v7;Z xD  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort uW nS<O  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total }2c}y7B,_  
(years) (%) (%) (%) eBAB7r/7  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) sf*SxdoZU  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) x#8=drh.:C  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 18A&[6"!  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) _SP u`=~K  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) k13/yiv  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) J#x91Jh  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) @J<B^_+Se  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) dY-a,ch"8p  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) (x^|  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) Ro1' L1:  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) Awh"SU Oh0  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) % 9D@W*Z  
Age-standardized n#&RY%#`  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) ( &*F`\  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 654%X(:q  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% ,?d%&3z<a  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, Q~@8t"P  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). ibuI/VDF  
Outcomes of cataract surgery (;j7 {(  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior Ur-^X(nL  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were 5->PD p  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular OWjZ)f/  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular "QF083$  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Ax^'unfQ:  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of #CS>A# Lk  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 1}uDgz^  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% heKI<[8l  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes qC4-J)8 Wk  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, X2uX+}h*tA  
P = 0.027). r9Z/y*q  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity UH.cn|R  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without ~tLR  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract :65HMWy.  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, *e6|SZ &3  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the t4IJ%#22  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 ! -c*lb  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this @EY}iK~  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four X4$e2f  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these >>$|,Q-.  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 4iz& "~&1  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one D H !Br  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract BB.TrQM.#  
surgery. 5 DB>zou   
DISCUSSION i'wF>EBz  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 4c=kT@=jX  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract {_Qxe1^g  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes  W6O.E  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual <~M9 nz(<  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and l~YNmmv_  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is SSLs hY~d  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, a{*'pY(R0$  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract dCP Tpm  
services throughout Australia. LH#LBjOZk  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age z8|9WZ:  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ZPsY0IzLo  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous %GbPrlu  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 0juIkN#  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract TDIOK  
between studies because of different methodologies and a<'$`z|s  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well bM^A9BxD  
as the different age structures of the study populations. }8M`2HMFR  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of ,,_K/='m  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. UT<b v}(J  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity \G=R hx f  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. bC>>^?U1m  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ~wf~b zs  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. jjwMvf.R  
80 McCarty et al. Usf"K*A  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 06 Esc^D  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total p:<gFZb  
(years) (%) (%) (%) <Mn7`i  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) uM)9b*Vbo  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( |z|)r"*\4  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) Qv0>Pf  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) iC|6roO!jk  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) mGpkM?Y"  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) Rc:cVK  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 2@m(XT (  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) e|5B1 rMM  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) ?Y6la.b c{  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) S5E,f?l  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) z@l!\m-  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) _ U8OIXN  
Age-standardized 18p3  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) F {*9[jY  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract `YmI'  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. snTJe[^d  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 mam5 G!$  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the \/'#=q1  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude |+;K hC  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the d JQ }{,+6  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). |Y8Mk2,s  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains g"Q} h  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 'x45E.wYw  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than cEdz;kbUM  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, Yn$>QS 4  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ."F'5eTT~  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, gB{]yA"('  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens TM/|K|_  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. &w;^m/zP3  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable @ yg| OA}  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ]U#[\ Z  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that *fQ ?A|l!x  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and n $O .>  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is 2sd ) w  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted C>JekPeM  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement V`R)#G>IH%  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We \N`fWh8&  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 0uVk$\:i  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have _gPVmGG  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this 7,W]zKH  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their [Hv*\rb  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants  fW5" 4,  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the ( E"&UC[  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ so?pA@O  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their P<cMP)+K  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to 3r~>~ueZ  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change HO%E-5b9  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function q9W~ 7  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ;xW8Z<\-  
overall quality of life.22 y+ 6`| h_  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Aj8l%'h[  
significant posterior capsule opacification following x38SSzG:L  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% vHs>ba$"  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated rQu  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear SWNU1x{,c\  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an !p]T6_t]Q  
opaque capsule. fs2m N1  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and Ph(]?MG\_  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, \GijNn9ah  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 8Zcol$XS'  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more fn VW/23  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ;yk9(wea}"  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 :3111}>c  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any MxM]( ew~7  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 6V'wQqJ  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care NEq t).   
in Australia may explain the fact that people without VKq0 <+M  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the =]=B}L `  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated o\_ Td  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ??|d=4g\  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem T{_1c oL  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract #=X)Jx~  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will Y*5Z)h 1  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the kR<xtHW  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in j`>?"1e@x  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well AyE%0KmraK  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes Kg4QT/0VA  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. *,E;   
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract nVz5V%a!\q  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 77+ | #< J  
cataract extractions increases. zl0;84:H  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS *6NO-T; -  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 6kP7   
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the A|2 <A !  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell :9(3h"  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and \|v`l{  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient %,33gZzf  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal r])Z9bbi  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 6hp{,8|D"m  
REFERENCES 9X!ET!  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. :M@Mmp Ph  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. U?^OD  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, Ud$Q0m&  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population xM% pvx.'L  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. f(!E!\&n^  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens <}&7 a s  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated !I N @i:m  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. YbzM6u2  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related pG(Fz0b{  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. vuXS/ d  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. `Uv)Sf{  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye A1Ka(3"  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population \N?7WQ  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 2%5?F n=  
363–71. Tj&'KF8?L  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. ) 9MrdVNv  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye b"Zq0M0 l  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. ZBF1rx?  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. vm|!{5l:=y  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient eI0F!Yon  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. =rEA:Q`~w  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. H/^B.5RYE>  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ka#K [qI  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. ,7<DGI_y  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. +ZclGchw  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too t-!m vx9Z  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal Hng!'  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: Xk?R mU6  
77–80. [A ]Ca$':  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice q4k.f_{  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? MQJ%He"  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 0yz~W(tsm  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest /=T H08  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye ~,gLplpG0  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic L7}i q0  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ] IS;\~  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading g8l5.Mpx  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. w4,]2Ccn.  
82 McCarty et al. #9\THfb  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & B)6#Lp3  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Xu6K%]i^  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume @\jQoaLT$_  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International k;Hnu  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. +  xp*]a  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 8_a3'o%5  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. iP#=:HZu;  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison MM gx|"  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased C ) ?uE'  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment CTp!di|  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. `Mk4sKU\a  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the e:E# b~{  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health PsbG|~  
Organization, 1997. [zh"x#AyI  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, ,Sg33N ?  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 56{I`QjX  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. eFFc9'o  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. Y(r@v  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of S4bBafj[I  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative =~jA oOC@  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. mCdgKr|n  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Mu2`ODe]  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated Im)EDTm$  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ,S!w'0k|n  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 0+`Pg  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 3Aj*\e0t  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and ;`UecLb#  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. !9 f4R/ ?  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. CS@&^SEj  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to &&7r+.Y  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. > 0.W`j(s  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. :2y"3azxk  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A gQouOjfP  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule XvKFPr0~  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ( u`W!{1\  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. X G 0v  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health vAi$ [p*im  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ,t,wy37*D  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 0LL c 1t>}  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, b,<9  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract JTW)*q9a  
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