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 UmP/h@8  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes G5BfN U  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to ,q`\\d  
unoperated cataract in Australia. hn G Z=  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 2`K=Hby  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ]m3HF&  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination *w`sM%]Rq  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography z\W64^'"Z  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who W a Rw05r  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater i>`%TW:g  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or /hR&8 `\\  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. +5*95-;0  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne E<Y$>uKA  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 (mpNcOY<D  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria "%w u2%i  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract P/eeC"  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had IFL*kB   
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 )m T<MkP  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber b2Fe<~S{  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber (y~TL*B  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 1.GQau~  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or `*R:gE=  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven r q].UCj  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate I+!0O  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery ![=yi tB  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% +I|vzz`ZVr  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone hL{KRRf>  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an [RhO$c$[\  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision VlsnL8DV  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no +a+Om73B2  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 1>h]{%I  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance z Rr*7G  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ]{@-HTt  
cataract. p_%Rt"!  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is 2fd{hJDq;5  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced $'M!HJxb  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of T(Eugl"  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes "+G8d' %YV  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. W^l-Y %a/o  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health !%c\N8<>GD  
services accessibility, prevalence oUU1+F-  
INTRODUCTION H**Xu;/5@  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in aqk!T%fg  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all kt:! 7  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate @\#td5'  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be }o`76rDN  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 &Z%?!.4j@  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting L4nYXW0y  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is ZD{LXJ{Vm  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 0 kW,I  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists C~/a-  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather .?$gpM?i  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral %EB/b  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 4Fr  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for ep{FpB  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has eJ-nKkg~a  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 4o[{>gW  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is \dah^mw"  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the IH+|}z4N?>  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract Z,PPu&lmE/  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence tKXI k9e  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors 7@W>E;go  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to 9hyn`u.  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. qJ-/7-$ ^  
METHODS b& U62iq  
Study population y?3; 06y|  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual 'LDQgC*%  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 wUJcmM;  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to "" EQE>d  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. zfdl 45  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ]6j{@z?{  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen .T`%tJ-Em  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites <F'\lA9  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.  cU  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 CTmT@A{  
Original Article {M)Nnst"~  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia h{qgEIk&  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD #<xm.  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia g RzxLf`K  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, [V`r^  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au C,eu9wOT  
78 McCarty et al. .6J$,.Ig  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural F"mmLao  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural |uJ%5y#  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify  ~$J2g   
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a Iga0 24KR  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of ~VB1OLgv#.  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, G!yP w:X  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Ho]su?  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. 19] E 5'AI  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local xyxy`qRA  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. n&!-9:0  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 9tnD=A<PS  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. u1.BN>G  
Assessment of cataract eJX#@`K  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after Vt ohL+  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine uw8f ~:LT  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the ajpX L  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using (-co.  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and e#q}F>/L  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on D/' dTrR  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) ss-D(K"  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, yh=N@Z*zP  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, q cno^8R  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than P93@;{c(  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to {xB3S_,8  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual Ir]\|t  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, ?h2}#wg  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. Y9|!+,  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to M^I(OuRMeI  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ;wD)hNLAvR  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight x)VJFuqy  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the i mM_H;-X  
analyses. tnIX:6  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., .e5Mnd%$M  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in . ]M"# \  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. WPDyu .QD  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman =w^M{W.w  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph I 2DpRMy  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were YbLW/E\T  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera y?!"6t7&  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 J^/p (  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately Rva$IX ^]  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated eiOW#_"\  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies "I TIhnE  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were 6zn5UW#q  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, Qci]i)s$js  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph MY/}-* |  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical iR0y"Cii  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 1&$ nVQ  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to c"xK`%e  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. E!AE4B1bd  
Assessment of risk factors u2[w#   
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information d5l UGRg  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 W'.m'3#z  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration wdZ/Xp9 ]  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, Lh<).<S  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension bu"!jHPB  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ~v"L!=~G;a  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were o? $.fhD   
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to JMM W  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 'Z|mQZN  
and use of vitamin supplements. 8sCv]|cn  
Data management and statistical analysis {}Za_(Y,]  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a b_):MQ1{  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, OUXR  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or DFTyMB1H  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at )F2OT<]m,  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms BF<ikilR  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and @ry_nKr9  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency *WT`o>  
checks were performed on the entire data set. C>w|a  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was B93+BwN>95  
employed for statistical analyses. w1DV\Ap*  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ?I@W:#>o  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to >e"#'K0?\  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five VM,]X.  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates &JI8]JmU)  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 6i~WcAs  
data were weighted according to the 1996 |H+Wed|  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the *`RkTc G  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. n=ux5M  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ,WB{i^TD  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated ox (%5c)b|  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted {,~3.5u   
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the & 9 ?\b7  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. KyQX!,rV  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically )TH@# 1  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use *ppffz  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The "!%l/_p?  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment hFl^\$Re  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with  1HZO9cXJ  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence '(L7;+E  
limits. q(2'\ _`u  
RESULTS QW(Mz Hg  
Study population V /V9B2.$  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ?oHpFlj  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) <3C*Z"aQ>|  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did Y#P%6Fy  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was  v<(  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as .+A+|yR  
a whole. &AbNWtCV+G  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 8&`LYdzt  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The pohp&Tc m  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to S2VA{9:m  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural V/I<g  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) S2GxV/E  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 9H`XeQ.  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 0*D$R`$  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases GM f `A,>  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any Lhb35;\  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). U7}yi$WT  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three 70tH:Z)"  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence ~^fZx5  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes Jgd'1'FOs  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% +V046goX W  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract tm RXgTS  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract X296tA>C`  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall ,,Q O^j]4~  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was EPM-df!=  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). ^sEYOX\  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract {~"/Y@&]R  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified ]e>w }L(gV  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated  KD7dye  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents O6a<`]F  
as information about risk factor exposure was not $f=J2&D,Cz  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed s.N/2F& *W  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence tla 5B_  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic # 0Q]dO  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a )SRefW .v  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use L<-_1!wh  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private %w vdn  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, Ln<`E|[29  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. Yi+wC}   
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the " H&W}N  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 5Y'qaIFR  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract xH(lm2kvT  
surgery were not available. O%zU-_|*  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate +wvWwie  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had 2U\u4N O{  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been mPN@{.(j  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment w QH<gJE/:  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant [.'|_l  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 3<Zq ]jk?n  
model. The factors that remained significantly related 1s2>C!\  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever # 448-8x  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been '}JhzKNj  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors qL&[K>2z  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate W*4-.*U8a  
model. rEnQYz  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract 9T}pT{~V  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with X_ cV%#  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 3yY}04[9<  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort /-ch`u md  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total {3p4: *}  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 1N^[.=  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) ICoHI  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) =wHVsdNCN  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) t#/YN.@r  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) P[#e/qnXu|  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) Ic:(Gi- %  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) }DE g-j,F  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) Gg3,:A_ w  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) Co_A/  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) [0[i5'K:  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) u+e{Mim  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) v ~?qz5:K~  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) cAqLE\h  
Age-standardized 2dcV"lY  
(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) +z\^t_"f  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 S6M}WR^,  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% n;Q7X>-f8`  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 4*#18<u5  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). J +DDh=%  
Outcomes of cataract surgery +wU@ynw  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior b:m88AG  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were [{,T.;'<j  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular L>NL:68yN  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular x8\?}UnB  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact =sU<S,a*  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of f4b/NG|  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected J T7nG.9  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% 0c]/bs{}  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ,vawzq[oSy  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, a=1@*ID  
P = 0.027). =.U[$~3q%  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Zw9FJ/Zn@  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without beGa#JH,  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract P[ck84F/  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, E\EsWb  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ~2N"#b&J  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 8z`G,qh  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this (Q!}9K3  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four 'n]w"]|  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these F6|]4H.3Q  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction EU;9 *W<  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 1{. |+S Z!  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract !zpRrx_  
surgery. )[IC?U:5I  
DISCUSSION XJ\DVZ  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically vWv"  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract g2ixx+`?|:  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes hEH?[>9  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual  `25yE/  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and Vwf$JdK%&l  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is H@>` F  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, O+]ZyHnB  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract  'KL0@l  
services throughout Australia.  %OCb:s  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age ie95rZp  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is P|E| $)m  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous FVbb2Y?R  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye s^9Voi.y  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract G~[x 3L'  
between studies because of different methodologies and 7S :\"A7  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well xm~`7~nFR  
as the different age structures of the study populations. \?-<4Bc@  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of yx[/|nZDC4  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. X`K<>0.N  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity ? :%@vM  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. }R2u@%n{  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the !9e=_mY  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 'JE`(xD  
80 McCarty et al. _;y9$"A  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort LonxT&"!D  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total ,[KD,)3y  
(years) (%) (%) (%) &r /Mi%  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) V f&zL Sgr  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( sl l\g  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) 'H>^2C iM  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) $a]`nLUa  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) M7~2iU<#  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 8TKnL\aar  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) q3!bky\  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) .`eN8Dl1  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) T!#GW/?  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) r l%  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) W{+2/P  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) #c!lS<z  
Age-standardized $6 f3F?y7  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) {!L~@r  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract _B<X`L =  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. n_A3#d<9  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 H1 ./x6Hr  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 8nV+e~-w  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude T8$y[W-c  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the g) jYFfGfH  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). )ez9"# MH'  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains )Aqtew+A&  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban #\m<Sz5Gp#  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than ON(kt3.h  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, li.;IWb0+)  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in q/,O\,  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, "chDg(jMZ  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens f-Z/t fC  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. b ]KBgZ  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable XSLFPTDEc  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, j#ab_3xH  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that KZf+MSq? B  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and y m1Y4,  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is P*j|.63  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted Q=$2c[Uk  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 3JR+O <3D  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We p`qgrI`  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction f!X[c?Xy"  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have ox.F%)eQ  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this h<QY5=S F  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their @6-jgw>W2  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants fk-RV>yr  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the >vsqG=x  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ :ShT|n7  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 8 z\xrY  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to #/37V2E  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change YS_; OFsd  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function WNc0W>*NE1  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Xch~ 1K  
overall quality of life.22 !;'=iNOYR  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually u ^RxD^=L  
significant posterior capsule opacification following GC'O[q+  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% [2cD:JL  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated q5S9C%b  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear Znv,9-  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an ,hmL/K0"(5  
opaque capsule. &%Tj/Qx  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and 93 hxSRw  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, \73ch  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We u]@[' 7  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more kcx Ad   
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is hpk7 A np  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 i!Ga5v8n:  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any QmIBaMI#  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of U/BR*Zn]*  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care zdH kG_PT  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without rrv%~giU  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the rVsJ`+L  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated Y6d@h? ht  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. LreP4dRe  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem BsJC0I(  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract SX-iAS[<  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will W@!S%Y9  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the Q NVa?'0"Y  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in wlmRe`R  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well X\ F|Tk3_  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes ~e.L.,4QZ8  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. _wL BA^d^  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract lb1Xsgm{  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 2GStN74Xr  
cataract extractions increases. 6S\8$  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS >@AB<$ A  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 7v_8_K  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the G vlS%  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 76` .Y  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 5 rUdv}.  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient o%*xvH*A  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal 9]@!S|1  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 1g~R/*Jo  
REFERENCES ^y4Z+Gu[  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. .XhrCi Z  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. FNId ;  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, pFz`}?c0  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population j$5LN.8J  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. @$K"o7+]   
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens _t}WsEQ+P  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ,wdD8ZT'Ip  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ##4HYQ%E  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related w.-!UD9/.x  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ef E.&]  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. :S(ZzY Q  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye vEz"xz1j!]  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population ps DetP  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: &XUiKnNW  
363–71. QnX(V[  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. Hg (Gl  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye _/<x   
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. z,%$+)K  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. d4z/5Oa  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient i8HTzv"J  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. 1D!<'`)AY  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. WvZ8/T'x  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated b9dLt6d  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. @>H75  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. x.R4% Z  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too /fV;^=:8c  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal OprkR  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 7EO_5/cY  
77–80. 2WYPO"q  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice n#_$\ p>Yd  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ZLAy- 9^Y  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. v0jgki4 t  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest /%A*aGyIc  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye cDH^\ -z  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic h>OfOx/{q9  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. \6*I'|5 d  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading N_[* H  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. I"7u2"@-8j  
82 McCarty et al.  l"]}Ts#  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & (0y~%J  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. RF0HjgP  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume A '];`  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International -Wi` G  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. AX/m25x  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and Z Sd4z:/  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. cJ @Wt>YI  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison qR+!l(  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased +pn N!:q  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment `(/w y  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. o"R7,N0rB  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the ThbGQ"/  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health =]Jd9]vi  
Organization, 1997. v9O~@v{=  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, Q9G;V]./  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation L"*/:$EJL.  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 2n"V}p>8i#  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6.  o.\F.C$  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of e|WJQd4+S  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 'o>B'$  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. G..aiA  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. qfRH5)k  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ' AEE[  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. {v ;&5!s  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. Ob`d  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract Z+. '>  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and :~N-.#  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. .I0q Gg  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. MC:@U~}6  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to =\wxsL  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. \k!{uRy'  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. %Ax3;g#  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A nWYN Np?h  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule L4z ~B!uvF  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. g+>(dnX  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. qjdMqoOCjl  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health O5kz5b> Z  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. :AF =<X*5  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in .e=:RkI,  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, Q)" Nu.m &  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract X"e5 Y!:M-  
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:
4+6=? 正确答案:10
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交